Building Typology Study by Syaza Yunos

BUILDING TYPOLOGY STUDY PROJECT 2 NOR HAYATI HUSSAIN (AR1323) ARCHITECTURE CULTURE & HISTORY 2 BACHELOR OF SCIENCE (HONS) (ARCHITECTURE) JULY 2011 INTAKE SEMESTER 2 2012 SYED YUNUS MUHD IZZAT OTHMAN NIGEL FLOYD LO ADIB AZLI SHAMIL SHUKRI KOVARMAN KHAIRUL AZIM YUSRA BASI NKYA LAU LEE XIN NUR SYAZWANI NURUL AISYAH AZREEN ARMANI JILLIAN JOMININ

1007P11013 1007P10648 1007P79327 1007P10276 1007P10971 1007P10402 0300424 0304627 1007P10668 1007P79444 1007P79492 1007P10316 1007P

TABLE OF CONTENTS KING’S CROSS STATION

- OLD KING’S CROSS-STATION - PURPOSE OF REFURBISHMENT - NEW KING’S CROSS-STATION

IPOH RAILWAY STATION

- HISTORICAL BACKGROUND - ARCHITECTURAL INFLUENCE - DIAGRAMMING - COMPARISON

KUALA LUMPUR RAILWAY STATION

- HISTORICAL BACKGROUND - ARCHITECTURAL INFLUENCE - DIAGRAMMING - COMPARISON

JOHOR BAHRU RAILWAY STATION

- HISTORICAL BACKGROUND - ARCHITECTURAL INFLUENCE - DIAGRAMMING - COMPARISON

BANGKOK RAILWAY STATION - HISTORICAL BACKGROUND - ARCHITECTURAL INFLUENCE - DIAGRAMMING - COMPARISON

KING’S CROSS RAILWAY STATION LONDON, UK

YUSRA BASI NKYA NUR SYAZWANI

INTRODUCTION “… We were all told to admire King’s Cross for its functional simplicity, an earnest of the new dawn…”

(London’s Historic Railway Stations, 1972)

OLD KING’S CROSS-STATION ARCHITECT

GREAT NORTHERN HOTEL

LEWIS CUBITT

King’s Cross-station was ﬁrst opened in 1852, designed by Lewis Cubitt. Lewis Cubitt was a very successful bridge designer - though much of his works was overseas (outside Britain). Due to this, historians did not give him much attention. Unlike his brother, Thomas Cubitt, who had begun his career as a carpenter but then was the greatest London speculative builder and developer of the 1820s. Lewis Cubitt was also the architect to build the Great Northern Hotel that was adjacent to the western terminal of the King’s Cross-Station. This hotel was built in 1854. Unlike the station, it was of no remarkable architectural distinction. However, the passing years had given it a charming patina.

ARCHITECTURE INFLUENCE The King’s Cross-Station station was built on the site of a former Small Pox and Fever hospital. The design of this station was claimed to be based on the Tsar of Russia’s riding stables. Initially, it was designed to be simple and functional as it was the largest railway station in Britain at its time. King’s Cross-station was built in a hurry. This is because of the fact that during that time, the Great Northern Railway had succeeded in gaining Parliamentary authority to built its main line from Doncaster to London. And with Maiden Lane as a temporary terminus around 1850, this showed signs of weakness and it was an urgent need for a replacement. Thus, Maiden Lane station was then being replaced by the King’s Cross-station.

SITE PLAN, KING’S CROSS-STATION

DEVELOPMENT Although the King’s cross-station was opened in 14th October 1852, its constructions did not ended until 1899 due to the addition of more platforms to the station on top of the two passenger platforms. These platforms were for the storage and movement of locomotives and carriages, which were in between the two passenger platforms. This totalled up to eight platforms for the whole station. Moreover, it has been rebuilt several times with the increase of suburban traffic. Throughout the nineteenth century, passenger traffic into King’s Cross-station increased significantly, putting a great deal of strain on the functionally designed station. All eight platforms were utilised and an additional three platforms for suburban traffic were added to the west of the building to cope with demand.

FLOOR PLAN, 1852

DESIGN & BUILDING CONSTRUCTION “Cubitt, perhaps because he came from a family of builders and engineers, looked at his job with equal pride but no romanticism. The two arched roofs are frankly displayed as the predominant motif of the façade. The roof of the clock tower heralds the coming of the new Italian villa ideals. Otherwise one does not look for motifs at King’s Cross-station. The architect was satisﬁed to depend, as the Builder put it in 1851, ‘on the largeness of some of the features, the ﬁtness of the structure for its purpose, and a characteristic expression of that purpose’.”

(Pevsner, Buildings of England, 1952)

Lewis Cubitt designed the station to be simple and functional with builders, John and William Jay. This acquired two train sheds of about 800ft long, 105ft wide and 71ft high. A plain brick screen of about 216ft long closes these platforms. Attached to the screen are two large arch windows with a porch of six arched openings. There is also a square Italianate clock tower of 112ft high that divides the six arched porches and the two large arch windows in the middle to give a symmetrical faĂ§ade look on the station. This clock tower is the stationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s only ornament. Initially, the ribs of the twin glazed semi-circular roofs were made of timber, which is a late use of material for the purpose. These had to be later replaced with iron, the eastern shed in 1866 and the western in 1886.

PURPOSE FOR REFURBISHMENT By the twentieth century, this station has become too overcrowded and the eight platforms weren’t sufficient enough and this showed a serious decline. Moreover, due to the Olympics 2012 occurring in London, the refurbishment was in need and the belief that the older station’s design has surpassed its time in terms of design. One of the main changes noticed on the King’s Cross-station is the Western Concourse; this concourse is added in order to help create a larger, more expensive space below in order to provide large enough area for movement due to the old station’s limited space for passengers. It is also to emphasize just how large the space is due to when this concourse was first built; it required more expansion for shops, offices and other commercial attractions for tourists. This change is due to the fact that the Western Transit shed provides the opportunity for a significant business location, as well. This refurbishment gives a unique and new feeling to the office space: combining history and contemporary. Another reason why they decided to alter the building’s design is because they wanted to be able to achieve the creation of a unique and innovative structure that suits to represent one of the major developments in the UK.

NEW KING’S CROSS-STATION Since 2002, £2.5 billion has been invested in the transport infrastructure in an around King’s Cross-station for refurbishment to improve the access and facilities for the London Underground. A new ‘Platform 0’ was also opened in the east side of the station in 2010 to create extra capacity in the station while refurbishment of the west side was being taken place.

ARCHITECT & ARCHITECTURE INFLUENCE A new Western Concourse was designed by John Mc Aslan & Partners and was opened in March 2012, making use of the space between Lewis Cubitt’s Great Northern Hotel and ofﬁces situated in the western side of the station. The transformation of King’s Cross-Station involves three very different styles of architecture: re-use, restoration and new build. The train shed and range buildings have been adapted and reused, the station’s previously obscured Grade façade is being precisely restored, and a new highly expressive Western Concourse has been designed as a centrepiece and the ‘beating heart’ of the project.

DEVELOPMENT The redevelopment process project involves replacing the arched roof of the station, building a semi-circular concourse and demolishing the existing one-storey extension. This new concourse is designed to be three times bigger than the existing concourse. This will increase the size of the station from 2000m2 to 8000m2 The new concourse effectively shifts the geographical centre of the station signiﬁcantly westward. The main purpose of the concourse is to give the station an almost airport-like split between the ‘arrivals’ and ‘departures’, and to facilitate a similar split between commuter and long-distance trafﬁc.

DESIGN, BUILDING CONSTRUCTION & FUNCTION The main materials that are used for the new Western Concourse are steel and glass. The ongoing work will see that the 1970s concourse and travel centre removed, exposing Cubitt’s original façade and opening up a new public space in front of the station. The super-strong roof domed roof is constructed from 1,200 tonnes of steel with castings at the top of each supporting column. It basically covers the vast Western Concourse and spanning the full 150m length of that part of the station. It is supported by a 20m high-tapered central ‘funnel’ and 16 further smaller columns around the station. This allows it to cover a remarkable 8,424m2 – this is enough to cover three Olympic-sized swimming pools. About 15% of the roof is glazed to ensure plenty of light while passengers wait for their trains. It has two main functions: 1) to segregate the inside from outside and thus creating a boundary, i.e., inhabitants and tourists access control and 2) to distinguished the arrivals and departures categories.

DRAWINGS SITEPLAN

FLOORPLAN

SIDE SECTION

FRONT SECTION

OLD KING’S CROSS-STATION

REFERENCES • http://www.e-architect.co.uk/london/kings_cross_ eastern_range.htm • http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index. php?fuseaction=wanappln.projectview&upload_id=19346 •

http://www.all-art.org/history408-1.html

•

http://www.lner.info/co/GNR/kingscross.shtml

• http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/k/kings_cross_ thameslink/index.shtml • http://transportheritage.com/ﬁnd-heritage-locations. html?sobi2Task=sobi2Details&sobi2Id=62 • http://www.networkrail.co.uk/virtualarchive/kingscross/ • http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/londonkings-cross/ • http://www.victorianweb.org/art/architecture/london/55.html • http://www.oldstratforduponavon.com/kingscrossscript.html

IPOH RAILWAY STATION PERAK, MALAYSIA

SYED YUNUS IZZAT OTHMAN NIGEL FLOYD LO

INTRODUCTION In the early 20th century, railway stations in the main towns of Malaysia were symbols of status and modern development. The Ipoh Railway Station located at Perak, Malaysia which is located near Jalan Panglima Bukit Gantang Wahab in Ipoh. It is situated next to the Central Bus Station and the Main Post Office. Ipoh Railway Station was built at the peak of tin mining industry in 1917. This particular site was chosen because the site has a very strategic location where the main railway tracks during that period of time were nearby. It is also believed that the British wanted to make it into a heritage area by locating many important heritage buildings at that area such as Ipoh Town Hall and Ipoh High Court. The building is believed to have been constructed in 1914 by the government architect Arthur Benison Hubback. It has been recognized as one of historical buildings in the country due to its age, historical importance and architectural significance. Built with the combination of the British colonial and Moghul architectural influences mainly on its facades and roofs, the railway station is known locally as the “Taj Mahal” of Malaysia.

Ipoh’s station building is a three-storey ‘screen’ buiding which fronts three single- storey platform sheds behind it. A continuous carriageway runs through the front loggia providing shelter for passenger’ vehicles. Above this is a wide, shady verandah that serves as a lounge and restaurant to the 17-room hotel housed in the station. A special dining room is located in the center, under the octagonal ceiling of the main dome. The completion in 1917 was delayed for three years by the shortage of materials and high costs during World War I. Prominently, the platform area was completely rebuilt and modernized to level the platforms’ height with entrances to train carriages as well as accommodate the newly laid double track and overhead lines (these included replacement of the original underground tunnels between platforms and steel-and-wood pitched canopies with an overhead bridge and curving metal canopies). Although interior refurbishment on portions of the ground ﬂoor of the main building were also conducted, remaining elements of the station, including the station’s Majestic Hotel, were preserved. The overhaul was completed in October 2007, three months before the conclusion of railway electriﬁcation between Ipoh and Rawang

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND In 1894, Sultan Idris Murshidul Al-Adzam Shah (r.18871916) inaugurated the Ipoh-Batu Gajah railway with small identical stations at both ends. Frank Swettenham, resident of Perak, wrote of Ipoh: As the rich mining district, the focus of a number of roads and the present terminus of the Kinta Valley Railway, its importance is second to that of no other in the State. But Ipoh soon outgrew its old railway stations. On 17 August 1911, some of the town’s leading citizens expressed their dissatisfaction in The Times of Malaya, complaining that the Ipoh railway station “was merely of a standard type, scarcely worthy of a wayside Station.” However, government funds were not forthcoming for rebuilding the Ipoh Railway Station. Instead, Ipoh’s residents watched in disbelief as Kuala Lumpur erected its own magniﬁcent railway station with the style and grandeur of Mogul architecture- a situation hardly acceptable to the leading citizens of Ipoh, when the Kinta District yielded a greater revenue to the government than any other District in the Federated Malay States.

Nevertheless, Ipoh did eventually get a railway station beﬁtting Perak’s largest town. In 1914, government architect AB Hubback, the man behind the Kuala Lumpur Railway Station. Hubback was the government architect in Calcutta prior to being transferred to Malaya in 1908 and the Indian experience can be seen in his workmanship. Local sources indicate that the building was originally designed as a hospital and used as such prior to the 1900’s and its subsequent conversion to the station building

DESIGN CONCEPT Arthur Benson Hubback designed the Ipoh Railway Station in a grandiose, Mogul style with segmental pediments and spherical domes. It is a solid neoclassical building embodying strict symmetry, balance and harmony The Ipoh Railway Station has a linear design. The linear form which extends along the main axis creates a one way lane which is suitable for a railway station that functions as a movement and transportation based communication center. He also designed broad verandah on the upper ďŹ&#x201A;oors to allow for adequate ventilation. The interior building conveyed a tropical ambience, with high ceilings and airy verandas.

ARCHITECTURAL INFLUENCES Ipoh Railway Station is influenced by British colonial architecture styles. Besides neo-classical, neo-Moorish style can also be identified on the building’s façade. Moorish architecture is the mixture of European function and Islamic form. This style was introduced by the British to accommodate the tropical climate cultural and social environment of local region. AB Hubback was inspired by Mughal style, one of the exotic revival architectural styles that was adopted by architects of Europe and America. It reached the height of its popularity after the mid-ninetheenth century, part of a widening vocabulary of decorative ornamentation drawn from historical sources beyond the familiar classical and Gothic modes. With his knowledge of Anglo-Asian architecture in mind, he came out with the design of Ipoh’s Railway Station. A lot of Moorish-inspired domes and turrets are used on the façade that boasts and impressive British Raj Mogul style. This is why it is well known as the Taj Mahal of Ipoh. The imposing scale and extravagance of this style was suitable for the design of the station as it signified status, power and prestige. The station was heavily decorated with Neo Classical elements such as keystones, Corinthian columns, plasters, half globed domes, and arches. Hubback made allowance to adapt to the tropical climate by introducing deep continuous arcade loggias on the ground floor that ran 183 meters along the entire length of the station’s frontage thus provided shelter and shade.

BUILDING CONSTRUCTION TUNNELS & PLATFORMS

There are two proven access tunnels between the platforms and the main building. The shorter of the two presently in use connects platform 1 to platform 2, 3 and to platform 4, 5. In both cases, the tunnels are constructed of brick walls founded on mass concrete footings with a steel beam roof with mass concrete infill. Over the platform areas, the beams are 8 x 5 x 28 lbs/ft run section placed at 2’ centres. The tunnels are lowered at the railway lines forming a railway bridge where the beam centres are 12”. The thickness of the roof varies between 350 and 400mm and is considered due to construction methods used at the time. The floor of the tunnels is mass concrete with a light steel reinforcement present. Tunnel 1 terminates at the edge of platform 5 into a store, which is bricked up at approximately the platform edge. Indications are that this tunnel extends to the amenity shop (the original 1875 station) Tunnel 2 is presently abandoned however; it extends from the existing 1875 station waiting room into the KTM security office. The platforms are constructed in a filled embankment contained within a 450mm brick retaining wall. The formation is a compacted fill over laid by 600mm of 2” down compacted stone overlaid by bedded 125mm plain concrete slab toped with a sand bedded 2’ by 3’, 2” flag stone pavement.

WALLS

The supporting walls are 18” thick being constructed with a London or Staffordshire stock brick. There are some instances of local clay brick; however, predominantly the bricks are laid in alternate stretcher and bearer courses. The access through the walls into the building and public areas are via doors and large arches. The doorways are supported with steel lintels and ﬁnished in either a curved or triangle voussoirs architectural feature. The arch openings within the building are a crossetted voussoirs circular arch. The arches on the main dome and front face of the building are constructed by a curve voussoirs stone construction. Both arch types contain keystones and are supported by quoins at the shoulders interlocked into an Ashlar walling construction.

WINDOWS & DOORS

The majority of windows and doors are original and manufactured from hard wood. The door panelling and window frames are entailed with additional panelling and mesh overlay speciﬁcally for the windows. Various architectural features are incorporated for the windows and doors. These varies from shaped transom to voussoirs. The walls feature various stone stepping and indentation generally considered as entablature and occasional pediment especially over the window areas. 24

COLUMNS

The columns are constructed with brick with a stucco concrete ﬁnish. Rounded columns are pinned and constructed from a reconstituted stone similar to the footings. The columns or column arches together with the keystone arches form a classic pillar and arch construction. This construction is topped with a spreading plate girder beam. Within the structure there are a number of steel columns. These columns are boxed within a reinforced plaster encasement. These columns occur alternatively along the front of the building and internally. Internally these columns are situated in the shopping area, main entrance and Post Ofﬁce

DOMES

The three major domes are constructed from mass concrete and extended angle iron. The major dome at the centre of the building has a featured steel frame in which mass concrete has been laid to form the dome. The smaller domes have steel work support however concealed. All three main domes have 12” x 6” ring beams. The small minaret dome at the various corners of the building are constructed with brick resting on a cast stone ring beam. The exterior of the domes are covered with a bitumen coating and painted. 25

DIAGRAMMING STRUCTURE

The diagram above shows the structure of the station. The building is not supported by any columns or fra¬¬me support system; instead all the loads are supported by load bearing walls.

GEOMETRY

The diagram above is explaining that the architect uses a very simple spatial organization scheme which is mostly made out from combination of rectangular.

CIRCULATION

The diagram above showed the circulation of the station from the outside to the waiting room and then to the platform. The architect has created a very easy ﬂowing circulation for people.

SYMMETRY & BALANCE

The diagram shows the architect uses a very strict symmetrical rule of the Neo-classical style on the façade of the building. Also, to anyone who perceives the building’s façade will immediately states that it has a certain order of balance generally.

HARMONY & PROPORTION

The diagram shows the law of proportions is being used in order to create harmony in the architecture.

LINEARITY

The diagram above is showing the linear form which extends along the main axis creates a one way lane which is suitable for a railway station that functions as a movement and transportation based communication center.

ARCHITECTURAL INFLUENCES HORSESHOE ARCHES

Sometimes are referring to as Moorish arch and the Keyhole arch, is the emblematic arch of Islamic architecture which AB Hubback got from the times of his services in India.

BALUSTRADES

A series of baluster, multiplied side by side to form a sort of decorative railings running all the way from end to end.

CORINTHIAN COLUMNS

The type of columns that are being used looks like Corinthian mixed with local element because of the material that being used is from local resources.

COMPARISON ARCHITECTURE INFLUENCE

King’s Cross Station has a very rigid and straightforward design. This is because the station was design in a hurry by Lewis Cubitt, a very successful bridge designer. The station was very much influenced by Cubitt’s background. He came from a family of builders and engineers; he is not exposing to architecture art and science. That is why he designs the station with a very technical and rigid look. In comparison with Ipoh’s Railway Station, the building is very much influenced by British colonial architecture. The government architect, Arthur Benison Hubback, who was very experienced in using Moghul and Moorish styles, has adapted it in Ipoh’s Railway Station along with neo-classical style. It’s design is also influenced by local climatic conditions. The analysis that we can make between the station’s influences is that even though King Cross-Station is a British building located in Britain, it doesn’t have any local context, local architectural influences of any sort; rather it is influenced by the architect’s educational background (trained as an engineer). Ipoh Railway Station, on the other hand, is located in Malaysia, and has British colonial architecture influences. AB Hubback also adapted to the local tropical climate for example by introducing arcade loggia that stretches along the entire frontage of the building, thus providing shade and shelter.

SIMMILARITIES & DIFFERENCES Clearly, the design concept that Lewis Cubitt and AB Hubback had in their mind for King’s Cross-Station and Ipoh Railway Station respectively are very different. Lewis Cubitt designed the station to be simple and functional with no romanticism. With the two arched roofs are frankly displayed as the predominant motif of the façade. The station is integrated with a square Italianate clock tower and being its only ornament. 26

The architect was satisfied to depend on the largeness of some of the features, the fitness of the structure for its purpose and a characteristic expression of that purpose. He doesn’t use any architectural principles normally use on a building distinctively because the building doesn’t follow any style of architecture. On the other hand, Ipoh Railway Station followed a certain influences and style, embodying the strict rule of symmetry, balance and harmony of Neo-classical style. The building has adapted a very Moorish-style dome, giving its name Taj Mahal of Ipoh. The big dome displayed as the predominant motif of the façade. It also uses linearity in its design to compliment its function as a transportation centre unlike the King’s Cross-Station; you cannot see any linearity from its façade.

Even though designed by different architects and are miles apart from each other, both building still has its similarities. Both being very important landmarks and bring signiﬁcance inﬂuence to society during its own time, then till now. Both the buildings function as an important role as transportation hub for both people and materials. Also, both buildings has their own hotel integrated inside of the station designed by the station’s architect respectively. Ipoh’s Railway Station has a hotel called Majestic Hotel and King Cross-Station has a hotel called Great Northern Hotel.

REFERENCES 1) Site Visit to Ipoh Railway Station. 2) Badan Warisan. 3) A.G. Ahmad (1997). British Colonial Architecture in Malaysia 1800-1930, Museums Association of Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur. 4) C.V. Fee (2006). Landmarks of Perak, Raja Nazrin Shah Publications Sdn. Bhd. Kuala Lumpur. 5) V.P.Sujata (2002). Ipoh Railway Station Under Refurbishment, The Star Newspaper, August 23rd, Kuala Lumpur. 6) M. Wade, A.R Lubis, K.S Nasution (2005). Perak Postcards 1890s-1940s, Areca Books. 7)http://www.malayarailway.com/2009/08/ipoh-railway-stations.html

KUALA LUMPUR RAILWAY STATION KUALA LUMPUR, MALAYSIA

ADIB AZLI SHAMIL SHUKRI KOVARMAN

INTRODUCTION The station is located along a road named Jalan Sultan Hishamuddin, previously known as Victory Avenue, which in turn was part of Damansara Road. The railway station is designed in 1907 by a Biritsh architect ,Arthur Benison Hubback. The same government architect who designed most of the distinctive buildings of Mughal architecture in Malaysia

The present KL Railway Station building was built at a cost of $23,000 Straits dollars and became operational on 1 August 1910, replacing the Resident Station. It quickly became the main railway station as the Sultan Street Station was isolated.

HISTORY RESIDENT STATION This original first station, the Resident Station is located to the south of the current location. The Resident Station, named as such due to its proximity to the official residence of British Resident. Constructed of wood and a nipah palm roof, the station was the first in Kuala Lumpur, linking Kuala Lumpur to Klang (Pengkalan Batu) via the first railway line to connect the city with the rest of the Malay Peninsula (officially inaugurated September 22, 1886).

Residency Station, Kuala Lumpur, 1891.

SULTAN STREET STATION

The second station, Sultan Street Station, was constructed in 1892 at Foch Avenue (now Tun Tan Cheng Lock Road), close to the present Maybank Tower and Puduraya bus station. Its design was based on Resident Station, and was stationed along the Pudu railway line, a new line that branched off north from the 1910 station, and connected mines from Ampang to the city. The line was unique in that the initial leg of the track approaching Sultan Street Station from the main line was sandwiched between two carriageways of Foch Avenue, cutting across the east side of the city. Sultan Street Station was replaced by a smaller terminal station when the tracks at Foch Avenue were dismantled for road trafďŹ c, and was demolished after 1960.

KUALA LUMPUR RAILWAY STATION

Reason why the Resident Station was demolished. The present KL Railway Station building was built at a cost of $23,000 Straits dollars. operational on 1 August 1910, replacing the Resident Station. It quickly became the main railway station as the Sultan Street Station was isolated.

PURPOSE OF BUILDING A NEW RAILWAY STATION IN KUALA LUMPUR With the increasing number of passenger and usage of trains, including the growth of Kuala Lumpur, a new larger station was design to replace the stations built in 1886 and 1892. The building construction was commissioned in 1900 consist of three platform and a simple open-air station. An acting architect of Malayan Public Work Department, Arthur Benison Hubback is responsible with the building’s design.

EFFECTS OF BUILDING THE NEW KUALA LUMPUR RAILWAY STATION Resident Station was demolished after construction of the new Kuala Lumpur station was completed. Jalan Sultan Station was replaced by a smaller terminal station.

CONSTRUCTION PHASE Arthur Benison Hubback, a British Architectural Assistant to the Director of Public Works, undertook the design of the station. Having served in India, he utilized his knowledge of Anglo-Asian architecture in the region on the station’s design. Hubback prepared 2 architectural design which the simpler of that 2 got chosen because of the longer platforms. In the 1909,A.B Hubback senior ofﬁcer, G.G. Spooner added some extra budget for the construction of the Railways Station. However the contractor at that time refused to accept the tender even after the additional budget was approved. The 2nd tender was called for the superstructure while substructures are being constructed. the 2nd tender was received on 5th august 1909. the general manager of federated states railway, G.G. Spooner passed away before the Railway station ﬁnished construction.

The completion day for the 27 month construction ďŹ nished 6 weeks ahead of schedule and begun train services on 1st August 1910.

RENOVATION PHASE For the Renovation works, architects from Alam Bina Akitek(PAB) were appointed to rehabilitate all the major monuments in Kuala Lumpur. The work eventually Carried out Between August 1983 and April 1987 in 6 separate contracts, using 6 different contractors.

A new rear entrance

New windows installed

New platform canopy

The main renovation for this building is to change material according to time. The old material were decaying. The most urgent replacement they wanted was the domes.

DOME CONSTRUCTION

As for the replacement of domes using concrete, using a sprayed technique on a permanent steel former, after making large scale templates of the original mouldings.

Dome reinforcement

Dome in cradle 37

Dome during hoist

Pinnacle casts

Installation of new pinnacle

Complete dome

ARCHITECTURE STYLE MUGHAL ARCHITECTURE Kuala lumpur railway station (klrs) is one the most significant in kuala lumpur. Even in malaysia. And one of the most eye-catching elements at the building is the it’s unique architectural style. Which Mughal architecture. The building is primarily designed in a “raj” styling, mixture of western and Mughal architecture. But mainly towards Mughal architecture. Which enjoyed brief popularity in late 19th century colonial India, as well as Europe. Dominated by horshoe and ogee arches, and large chatris at the corner of the building accompanying smaller variations at the front, the station is comparable to the sultan Abdul Samad building and surrounding structures constructed around the Merdeka square during the period. With its own constructional and ornamental techniques, norms and conceits, grown from a sound historic-cultural and geo-physical background, and a transparent evolutionary process, Mughal architecture was a fully developed style and a perfect discipline, as none was a perfect prior to it, in medieval India. It had a time-span of 132 years, practically from 1526 to 1658 a.d. Nearly 400 monuments of this style have survived, including city-walls and gates, forts, palaces, tombs mosques, hammams, gardens, minarets, tanks, step-wells, saris, bridges, kos-minars. The façade of the building is designed with whitewashed spotting the distinctive arches and domes that give the building a grandeur fitting of an old world railway terminal. The railway station makes a quartet of Moorish influenced buildings that for a long time was what the city that grew out of a muddy confluence of rivers, had been identified with.

140

BUILDING LAYOUT AND ARCHITECTURE FEATURES The Kuala Lumpur Railway Station is divided into 2 main parts. Part 1 the terminal which consist of ofďŹ ce, waiting room and hotels. 2nd part the train platform shed. The Style of the building is British Raj, which have the combination of western and Mughal architecture.

Chatris- elevated domed shaped pavilions

Arched entranceways â&#x20AC;&#x201C; evenly curved and some pointed arches at the top

Deep continous covered verandah

143

Corinthian columns which support pointed and rounded arches

Towers with spires on top

144

Openings to facilitate fresh air and fenestration

Walls of rounded arches

Steel trusses

Large steel frames covering the platforms

Roof for fenestration

COMPARISON DIFFERENCES There are many difference between both of this train stations such as the spatial layout and forms as well as their architectural style or architectural language. The architectural style and the design for the King’s Cross station is based on the Tsar of Russia’s riding stables. While for the Kuala Lumpur Railway Station is based on a “raj” styling. Mixture of western and Mughal architecture.

KING’S CROSS STATION

KUALA LUMPUR RAILWAY STATION

• The station was inﬂuenced by neo-classical architectural style of the 19th century. • The station was designed to be simple and functional with builder, John and William Jay. • Two train sheds abut 216ft long, 105ft wide, and 71ft high. • A plain brick screen of about 216ft long closes these platforms. • Attached to the screen are two large windows with a porch of six arched openings.

• The railway station was designed in that particular style because, the architectural style of Moorish Revival or Indo-Saracenic architecture was famously enjoyed brief popularity in late19th century and early 20th century colonial India, as well as Europe. • Dominated by horseshoe and ogee arches, and large chhatris (six originally, with two added later) at the corners of the building accompanying smaller variations at the front. • The facade of the station is completely plastered, as opposed to buildings of similar styles that opt for exposed brickwork, and painted in light colours (usually white or cream) throughout its service.

SIMILARITIES • One of the main changes noticed on the King’s Cross station is the Western Concourse. • Is added to help create larger, more expansive space below in order to provide large enouh area for movement due to the old station’s limited space for passengers. • This refurbishment gives a unique and new feeling to the ofﬁce space: combining history and contemporary. • Another reason to change the building’s design is because they wanted to be able to achieve the creation of a unique and innovative structure that suits to represent one of the major developments in the UK.

• The north wing was converted for ofﬁce use by 1967, closing off the arched verandahs with windows. • In 1986, the station was refurbished, with the interior and relevant windows replaced with modern counterparts while the exterior was repaired and preserved, and additional new facilities and buildings, including air-conditioned waiting halls, tourism information counters and snack bars • The refurbishment also saw an additional extension built on the south wing of the building, sporting “Raj” stylings that dominates much of the building, and the addition of a frontal facade for the north wing that sports similar architectural elements, masking hints of Western designs from the front • These changes resulted in the building sporting two additional chhatris, two on the corner of each wing, alongside the original four. 48

DIAGRAMMINGS STRUCTURE

SYMMETRY & BALANCE

CIRCULATION

NATURAL LIGHTING

PLAN TO SECTION

REFERENCES 1) (2008). Pictorial History of Railways around Kuala Lumpur . Available: http://searail.mymalaya.com/Selangor/ Selangor%20Early%20pictures.htm. Last accessed 1 July 2012. 2) Prof. R Nath. (2007). Mughal Architecture. Available: http://www.mughalarchitecture.in/home/index.htm. Last accessed 1 July 2012. 3) (2011). Architectural masterpieces of KL: The Railway Station.Available: http://thelongnwindingroad.wordpress. com/2011/01/13/architectural-masterpieces-of-kl-the-railway-station/. Last accessed 1 July 2012. 4) (undated). MUGHAL ARCHITECTURE. Available: http:// indiapicks.com/annapurna/S_Mughal.htm. Last accessed 1 July 2012.

JOHOR BAHRU RAILWAY STATION JOHOR, MALAYSIA

YUSRA BASI NKYA KHAIRUL AZIM LAU LEE XIN NUR SYAZWANI

INTRODUCTION The Old Johor Bahru Railway Station was ﬁrst opened in 1931. It was constructed during the year 1929, had it replaced the former wooden railway station, built in 1917 by Johor’s 21st Sultan, Sultan Abu Bakar. Sultan Abu Bakar, 1833-1895, was also known as the ‘Father of Modern Johor’ due to his intiation of developments and modernisations of the state of Johor. He was also a well-travelled ruler and had a good diplomacy with Queen Victoria of England as well as English colonists of Malaya. Moreover, this station was constructed by the Sultan Ibrahim, son of Sultan Abu Bakar, himself and both of the Sultans were Anglophiles. After succeeding his father, Sultan Ibrahim still continued the legacy of Sultan Abu Bakar in modernising the state of Johor with a sense of Westernisation.

This Old Johor Bahru Raiway Station, as well as, the Ipoh Railway Station, Kuala Lumpur Railway Station and the Tanjung Pagar Railway Station were the four major railway stations of Malaya during the its time. Furthermore, this railway station is current in the process to be converted into a museum, Keretapi Tanah Melayu Berhad, after it was closed in 21st October 2010. Due to this, renovations on the interior has severely changed and the original interior design has been replaced.

ARCHITECT The general design of the building was generated by Malaysian colonial government architects but was then built by experienced British workers: Swan and Mac Larden. Mac Laden was the same person who helped build Johor Bahru central police station and high court complex, which then shows you how much inﬂuence British colonial architecture had in Malaysia during that period around the 19th century The structure itself is made of durable brickwork construction and multiple vernacular architectural features which were included to the design due to the adaptation to the local climatic conditions and also due to the desire of various personnel working on the construction and design, to include features that represent the Malaysia Architectural style to the design as the building was going to be considered an advancement in technology and development for Malaysia, they did not desire the building to lose its ‘identity’ and ﬁnally they wanted the structure to blend with the local architecture of the area.

ARCHITECTURE INFLUENCE EXTERIOR FACADE ARCHITECTURE INFLUENCE • British colonial neo-classical • Malay Vernacular • Art deco • Mughal Architecture (India Muslim) • Straits Eclectic

INTERIOR ARCHITECTURE INFLUENCE Sultan Ibrahim and his father were greatly inﬂuenced by the western style of bureaucratic architecture, and buildings that have multi purposes through adding accommodation and dinning lounges. Although the building was symmetrical on the outside it wasn’t so from the inside. The interior organization of the building was similar to that of the European societies where comfort and hierarchy were the priority of spatial organization, the importance of hierarchy in the design is projected through the creation of waiting halls that have been divided according to social status, not excluding the entrances.

EXTERIOR FACADE ARCHITECTURE STYLES There were five main architectural styles that were influenced. They are: 1) British colonial neo-classical: The building itself had a very clear geometrical shape, and symmetrical façade with an entrance that was accentuated by horizontal projecting wings; an extremely common feature of many of their buildings, this structure was raised on a thick solid platform base, meant to portray glorification and long standing state power. 2) Malay Vernacular: Its influence on the building is seen at the skylight above the main and rear entrance doors; they are made of cast iron with a floral pattern showing Kerawang designs, which are the Malay traditional craft designs. They used ventilation frames that are found in a traditional Malay house, full height windows opening at the top floor, a low type of roof with a high ceiling and protruding attics which are used to help address the local climatic condition. 3) Art deco: It is an extremely decorative style by nature of the 1920s and 30s that uses boldly defined geometric shapes and strong colours. It is derived from a blend of various influences, including some aesthetics from continents such as Africa, Asia and South America, with a lot of influence from Futurists as well as Cubists. This style influenced overpowering shape of the vertical clock tower as well as the walls along the front and side facades. Poles, strong circular shapes, vertical lines and horizontal roof overhang are all features of art deco. 5) Mughal Architecture (India Muslim): The dome of the building including the four abstract features that are located above the clock tower are all inspired by Mughal architecture which is a mixture of Islamic, Persian and Indian architecture. Mughal towers are also at the four corners of the tower. Four blocks underneath, accentuate these towers, not forgetting an overhanging balcony, which is also a common feature in Mughal Architecture. Straits Eclectic: This is a style, which was originated from Britain as far back as the 15th century. The windows were altered so that their original window pans and doors made of wood were incorporated with horizontal louvers for fenestration which was a technique that greatly associated with the straits eclectic style. 56

SIGNIFICANCE TO AREA & ERA The Old Johor Bahru Railway Station, a prominent landmark of Johor bahru, was build at the east side of Jalan Tun Abdul Razak, which is now one of the most strategic areas of Johor Bahru. With Johor Bahru as one of the most populated cities in South East Asia, this railway station became one of the most important infrastructure built in Johor due to the fact that it was the south most station of Malaya that also acted as the gateway to trading networks in Singapore, which through them, to the world markets. And due to this, it initiated the economic growth of the state. The architecture of the Old Johor Bahru Railway Station signiﬁed the architectural period around 1920’s, which made the station unique. Its portrayal of extensive architectural styles somehow found it a way to mesh with its surroundings. Its main signiﬁcance in the world of architecture would be that it was a building that in-cooperates many different architectural styles without completely removing its origins vernacular qualities.

DEVELOPMENT, DESIGN CONCEPT & CONSTRUCTION The Old Johor Bahru Railway Station isn’t quite large with only 5,573 sq. ft., and it does not have precise information of the design concept that was achieved by the building’s architects. It is Generally a two-story building with a longitudinal placement running parallel to Jalan Tun Abdul Razak, with a symmetrical façade that was accentuated by a clock tower that is 3 stories high. The entrance is formed on a porch at the lower part of the tower while the exit is an emphasized doorway with an elaborate skylight. It also consists of long wide windows, which were seemingly spaced evenly on both sides of the entrance and exit depicting straits eclectic style.

As the building has gone through two major reconstruction phases since 1980 and altered many times, there is a visible change from the original Johor Baharu station to the recent one. The main construction changes that were made were mainly focused in the interior spaces such as main waiting areas for the passengers and ofﬁces. Moreover, parts of the building were constructed using wood, and since wood has a lot of maintenance issues the British colonialists resolved this issue by replacing all wooden public buildings with permanent masonry, which was a project that begun during the end of the 19th century.

CONTEXTUAL CONDITION Predominantly, this station does not only portray the architecture precedence and preferences of the past but as well as the political, socio cultural and economic contexts.

POLITICAL The political scenario of Johor during the time before the building of the Old Johor Bahru Railway Station was a story between the British Colonial Government and the Sultanate’s reigning policies. With this scenario, the station was brought about. This station’s construction was established by the British Colonial Government but Sultan Ibrahim had long planned about it. Thus, the construction of this station was well directed by the Sultan Ibrahim, himself. During the 19th century, the British was eager to build the railway station in Johor to link the railway network of its colonial cities, from Penang and Melaka, to Singapore. Nevertheless, Johor rulers wanted to simply build the railway station to help in the socio economic and rural agriculture development.

SOCIO CULTURAL As the Sultan Abu Bakar initiated the modernisation developments in the state of Johor with the preference of Western culture, his son, Sultan Ibrahim had also his sense of Western ﬂavour. Sultan Ibrahim exposed the architectural experience in the 19th century by the architects and the engineers whom were mostly from England or worked in other British colonial countries in Asia. This led Johor Bahru to become a colonial city with a strong Western inﬂuence. 58

ECONOMICAL An infrastructure so important that gave a huge impact to the economic of the Johor state was the railway. With just the railway, many agriculture developmets had emerged. The railway station was an encouragement for mobility and this helped make Johor a vibrant business and commercial district.

COMPARISON HISTORICAL ARCHITECTURE INFLUENCES The JBS had five main Architectural influences, namely; 1) British colonial neoclassic - 18th - 19th century, 2) Art deco - 20th century, 3) Malay vernacular – 10th-early 20th century, 4) Mughal Architecture – 17th century and finally, 5) Straits Eclectic – 19th- early 20th century. On the other hand, the GNR was influenced by: 1) British colonial neoclassic - 18th - 19th century and 2) Eastern ornamentation (on some interior parts) – 19th century. Although both stations were influenced by Hierarchy, the JBS’s influenced was for its interior spatial layout such as for its arrangement of offices, waiting areas and restaurants while the GNR’s hierarchy is basically for its routes and platforms.

SIMILARITIES

The Clock Tower: Both of the railway stations have a clock tower in the middle of the façade that emphasize on the symmetry and balance of the two stations. Space usage: Both of these railway stations were aiming to create a space that is both for commuting purposes as well areas for shopping and relaxation e.g. Lounges, hotels, Bars, Restaurants and so on. Both stations paid extra attention on the allocation of functional spaces. 59

Style influence: Both of the stations were influenced by styles from the 19th century around the industrial revolution, during this era they would be considered both to be upcoming from the early stages of modern architecture, both were particularly influenced by British colonialist and eastern ornamentation Main style: Both influenced by the British colonial style of living: mainly concerned with luxury and convenience in arrangement. Platforms: Both stations originally had two main platforms. Architects: Both of these stations were actually designed by the British, JBS was designed by colonial government architects and GNR was designed by Lewis Cubitt who was an English civil engineer as well as architect. Alterations: Both stations were altered in a way or another in the later years after the stations construction. Purpose of creation: Both stations main purpose of creation was to link that region; which was considered to be a hub of some sort to areas outside for factors such as trade, international connections, business and development for the region in which the station is located. Reasons for Renovation: The GNR was initially too overcrowded and the eight platforms weren’t sufficient enough and this showed a serious decline, this is one of the main factors that influenced the changes of some parts of the station, which was the same reason for the JBS, where they needed to acquire more space for other commercial spaces as well as overcrowding especially in the lower class.

DIFFERENCES

Size: Size is one of the main differences between the two railway stations, Kings-Cross Station (GNR) being relatively larger than the Johor Bahru Station, at a much bigger scale; the size of the JB Station is about 5, 573 sq. ft. compared to the Old GNR, which was about 457,380-sq. ft. Focus of spatial organization: As the JBS was mainly focused on the spatial organization of the interior structure to have some sense of hierarchy, the GNR on the other hand was more focused on separating functions of spaces through achieving a complete differentiation between those commuting inwards and those commuting outwards; Arrivals and Departures: centered around the idea of constraining and controlling encounter (Hierarchy of interior organization still played but as a minor part for GNR). Multiple inďŹ&#x201A;uences: The JBS was inďŹ&#x201A;uenced by a much wider variety of style and was considered to be extremely unique due to this, as compared to the GNR. Recent changes: The JBS is no longer functioning to this day; it was closed down on the 21st of October 2010 and conserved as a KTMB Museum. On the other hand, the GNR was only renovated during the period of study and is still functioning today, and it is said that due to its latest renovations and those upcoming, it still has a long future ahead. Simplicity: The old GNR was then greatly appreciated for its simplicity in terms of its design; this was not the case for the JBS, which was not meant to be simple in anyway, with its extensive use of ornamentation as compare to the GNR. 61

DIAGRAMMING SYMMETRY & BALANCE

The building had a symmetrical exterior façade and the line of axial symmetry was established through the center of the clock tower before any extension. The building loses its symmetrical proportion when the new parcel ofﬁce was added to its left end.

UNIT TO WHOLE

The whole building consists of a clock tower and two side buildings beside the tower.

REPETITIVE TO UNIT

The clock tower is most unique feature in the building and the windows are repeated rhythmically along the faรงade of the building.

PLAN TO SECTION

CICULATION

There are two main entrances to platform by passing the waiting halls and the circulation areas are public accessible space.

ADDITIVE & SUBTRACTIVE

The porch is the additive for the building.

MASSING

The general form of the building is the clock tower. 64

LIGHTING

There are more windows at the entrances of the building.

HIERARCHY

The most dominant spaces in the building are the main entrance of the building and the waiting platform with the high ďŹ&#x201A;ow of trafďŹ c were.

REFERENCES 1) http://www.malayarailway.com/2010/03/johor-singaporecauseway.html 2) http://www.keretapi.com/railway-stations.html 3) http://coolinsights.blogspot.com/2011/01/rollin-from-tanjong-pagar-to-johor.html 4) Lonely Planet Guide. 5) http://www.malaysia-traveller.com/johor-bahru-heritagetrail.html 6)http://www.aussiepete.com/2008/05/johor-singaporecauseway-history-and.html 7) Measured Drawings, 2011 Practicum 1, The Old Johor Bahru Railway Station research group

JOURNAL YUSRA BASI NKYA

KHAIRUL AZIM

What I gained from the research of the GNR is knowledge on one of the main inﬂuences of trade, businesses within Great Britain more speciﬁcally London, before, during and after the world war. I also learned that it is one of the most famous railway stations of all times and it has recently undergone many changes in the past few years from around 2005 and is yet to undergo many more after 2012. Many of the developments that occurred during the 19th century in London were mostly due to this railway station and it is a great mark that portrays the era of industrial revolution.

Johor government made a wise decision for closing 2010 Old Johor Bahru station from service into national heritage thus preserving one of our country’s treasure. The building by were greatly influenced by the western style of bureaucratic architecture. In the span of 8 years the old Johor station experienced several alterations and renovations partly to address the issue of maintenance and as an attempt accommodate progressive functional requirements hence due to exposure to weathering processes, the old Johor Bahru station has been significantly etched by time. The building itself had a very clear geometrical shape, and symmetrical façade and the structure itself was raised on a thick solid platform base meant to portray glorification and long standing state power. As the architectural style of the building resembles Art- Deco features, the building signifies the architectural period around the 1920’s, with a mixture of the areas vernacular architecture and other influences of the Middle East.

From the JBS I learnt of the main influence of trade between Malaysia, Singapore and other countries of the world, and how greatly this train station helped Malaysia gain influences from other areas such as Middle East and West. This railway station is a great historical mark for the area as t also represents the time where they were still under colonial rule; it marks the forward movement of development for Malaysia as a country. What I enjoyed the most about this particular railway station is its vast variety of architectural influences. As JB is an area that is significantly influenced by tourism, the station itself is a main part of the attractions; the station has also helped influence commercial, industrialized and urban areas of Johor Bahru.

LAU LEEXIN

NUR SYAZWANI

The Old Johor Railway Station, which exhibits several architectural styles such as British Colonial Neo Classical, Art Deco, Straits Eclectic, Moghul and Malay, was the landmark in Johor for the past 80 years. It reveals how British Colonial’s architectural styles were modiﬁed and adapted to local climate context. Nowadays, it no longer serves as railway station. The building is taken care and renovated to museum but by preserving the original architecture. The rich architecture elements in the building escape the fate of demolishment worth being one of the historical buildings in Johor and even in Malaysia.

This whole report has taught me greatly such as the management of time, people, information, research and simply myself. It has also gained me much knowledge on each of the railway stations picked to research about. The GNR research has given me a wider view on the British architectural influences on its colonized Southeast Asian countries and also a view on what influenced its own architectural style. While doing the Johor report, on the other hand, I have learned a lot more than I have expected: the social impact, the political scenarios of the time, the architectural styles after its influences and how does it all come about to build just one building. It was an intriguing report such that it was like a puzzle to be solved and it immensely impacted me and awed me by the fact that how every building has its own story to be told and these stories, they’re as significant as the building itself towards its environment and era.

HUA LAMPHONG RAILWAY STATION BANGKOK, THAILAND

NURUL AISYAH AZREEN ARMANI JILLIAN JOMININ

INTRODUCTION Hua Lamphong Railway Station, commonly known as “the Bangkok Railway Station” acts as the main railway station in Bangkok, Thailand. It acts the central railway station because all of the train routes originate from it. Before being constructed as a railway station, the site of the station was previously a national railway maintenance center which moved to Makkasan in June 1910. The construction of Hua Lamphong Railway Station started in 1910, and started operating on 25th June 1916.

MARIO TAMAGNO 70

ANNIBALE RIGOTTI

Originally, it was also a combined railway station, including transportation services for both goods and passengers. It is the oldest railway station in Thailand and was said to be designed similarly to Frankfurtâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s railway station in Germany. Hua Lamphong Railway Station was designed by Mario Tamagno, an Italian architect with countryman Annibale Rigotti. They also designed Bang Khun Prom Palace, Ananta Samakhom Throne Hall in the Royal Plaza, Suan Kularb Residential Hall and Throne Hall in Dusit Garden. During World War II, Allies bombed O Ping Hotel, a hotel nearby when attempting to bomb the railway station. The Thai Railway system was relentlessly damaged during the war and most of the main railway tracks from Bangkok southwards had been destroyed.

SIGNIFICANCE TO AREA Hua Lamphong Railway Station construction was completed in the year 1916 when it was under the ruling of King Chulalongkorn who was fascinated by Italian neo-renaissance architecture. Considering this train station was the last building built under his ruling, the architectural style is different compared to the other buildings around it that was built in the later years (1923-1946). The Station Hotel located next to Hua Lamphong Railway Station was built years after the completion of Hua Lamphong Railway Station and follows the Neo-Classical architecture as well.

Hua Lamphong MRT station which was built in the year 2004, has a post-modernism architecture style. However, the interior of the MRT station is inďŹ&#x201A;uenced by the neoclassical architecture with the existence of Greek columns in the station. The other buildings around it which was built after the completion of the MRT station were built in context with the MRT station, but not the railway station. The Station Hotel is then renovated to also be in context with the MRT station. In conclusion, the Hua Lamphong Railway Station is the only building in the area to have an Italian Neo-Classical faĂ§ade and architecture.

POLITICAL ANALYSIS Towards the end of the 19th century, many surveys were appointed by the Siamese authorities and certain western interest groups and governments to bring a railway system to Thailand. Holt S. Hallett, a British colonial administrator, conducted surveys with the intention of promoting a railway line to take British goods from Burma through Siam to China. However, the railway was never constructed.In 1887-1888, the Siamese government appointed Messrs Punchard and Co., British Railway contractors to survey a line from Bangkok to Ayutthaya and then to Korat. A second line was to go from Ayutthaya to Lopburi, then on to Lampang, Lamphun and Chiang Mai. From Chiang Mai it was planned to go north to Chiang Rai and eventually to Chiang Saen on the Mae Khong (Mekong river).As much as the surveys hold up, some years later, the northern and north-eastern lines through the section of the northern line beyond Chiang Mai were never constructed. Though the connection north to China via Chiang Saen and the Mae Khong, was very tempting from a trade point of view, but the engineering difficulties presented by the mountains of northern Thailand proved too unnerving. Agreeing with J. Antonio, a Portuguese photographer working for the Royal Railway Department, the first railway in Thailand was the Paknam railway opened in 1893, which operated until the 1950’s.Tracks to Ayutthaya started operating on March 9th 1894, extending to Korat in 1900 as the north eastern line. A branch line to Lopburi was the first section to Chiang Mai. In 1903 a line opened to Petchaburi on the west coast of the gulf of Siam also known as the southern line to Butterworth, Malaysia. The northern and eastern railways were controlled by the Northern Railway Authority, where as the west services were operated by the Southern Railway AuthorityThese two authorities were merged in 1917 as the Royal State Railways of Siam. Later, a third line was added to the northern network and all three lines ran Standard and Narrow Gauge trains, completed in 1930. Before forming the Royal State Railways of Siam, the northern and north-eastern networks were run by German engineers and the southern line by British engineers as it was reasonable for the lines to be run as two separated enterprises as the network were not connected. However, a bridge was built over the Chao Phraya river at Bang Sue so that the Southern line could join up with the other networks, meaning the international traffic would be able to begin and terminate at Hua Lamphong Station in Central Bangkok, making it easier for the users.

BUILDING CONSTRUCTION The construction of Hua Lamphong Railway Station took 6 years to be completed. The structure of the station is constructed using brick walls with paint as the ﬁnishes. Originally, the whole railway station is painted in white paint but was added gold paint for the plaster motives in their later decision to include local identity into the design of Hua Lamphong Train Station. Similar to most cultures, gold colour represents royalty, wealth and god. Furthermore, gold and white paints are the common colours of Siam architecture.

The main entrance of Hua Lamphong Railway Station is arch-shaped and so is the ceiling of the entire train station. The material used for the ceiling is corrugated metal. The entrance façade is covered with stained glass to allow natural light in. The ﬂoors are ﬁnished with ceramic tiles. A skylight is also built along the station to allow natural light into the building. Almost every building in Thailand has a very large portrait of their beloved king on its façade as a sign of love and respect to their king, His Majesty The King. The Hua Lamphong Railway Station displays the portrait of His Majesty The King on its stained glass façade.

COMPARISON At a glance, the first thing one would notice is the arched window at the facade of both stations. As you enter the building, you will see that both buildings have a skylight along the centre of both buildings, stretching from the front to the end. Another similarity is the Italianate influence in the architecture. In Hua Lamphong Railway Station, the Italianate influence can be seen throughout the building as it was the main architectural influence whereas in King’s Cross it is only seen on the clock tower. The differences between the two is the other influences present in Hua Lamphong which is not present in King’s Cross, such as De Stijl and Art Deco.

REFERENCES 1) Thailand By Train. (2004). A History of Thai Railways. Available: http://www.thailandbytrain.com/RailHistory.html. Last accessed 21st June 2012 2) thaitransit. (2008). SRT: The Main System (Hualamphong Station and rail yard). Available: http://thaitransit.blogspot. com/2008/04/srt-main-system-hualamphong-station-and. html. Last accessed 21st June 2012. 3) BKK. (2009). Hua Lamphong to Makkasan. Available: http://www.bkktours.com/bangkok/hua-lamphong-to-makkasan.html. Last accessed 21st June 2012. 4)Nils. (2004). The area around Hua Lamphong. Available: http://2bangkok.com/2bangkok-masstransit-paknam.html. Last accessed 21st June 2012.

BACHELOR OF SCIENCE (HONS) (ARCHITECTURE) SEMESTER 2 2012