TRANSFERABILITY OF SINGAPORE URBAN STRATEGY FOR AUTOMOBILE INDEPENDENCY TO BANGKOK: NEIGHBOURHOOD LEVEL

UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDONFACULTY OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENTBARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING

MAJOR RESEARCH PROJECT:

Benyatip ManajittMSc. Sustainable Urbanism

Word count: 7,925 WORDS

Being a Major Project in Sustainable Urbanism submitted to the faculty of

The Built Environment as part of the requirements for the award of the MSc.

Sustainable Urbanism at University College London, I declare that this project

is entirely my own work and that ideas, data and images, as well as direct

quotations, drawn from elsewhere are identified and referenced.

‘The case of Singapore appears to be an important prototype for reflection on the question of sustainable urban development and its specific conditions, practices and requirements in the context of Asian world city development’

(Wong & Goldblum, 2008)

I

CONTENT

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

ABSTRACT

LIST OF FIGURES

LIST OF IMAGES

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND

1.2 RESEARCH QUESTION AND OBJECTIVES

1.3 OUTLINE

2.0 MATERIAL AND FRAMEWORK

2.1 LITERATURE REVIEWS

2.2 TRANSFERABILITY OF TRANSPORT MEASURE FRAMEWORK

3.0 PLANNING OVERVIEW

3.1 SINGAPORE PLANNING OVERVIEW

3.2 BANGKOK PLANNING OVERVIEW

3.3 PLANNING OVERVIEW IN BRIEF

4.0 PLANNING AT NEIGHBOURHOOD LEVEL

4.1 SINGAPORE

4.1.1 SINGAPORE NEIGHBOURHOOD

4.1.2 IDENTIFYING THE STRATEGY ON SITE

4.2 BANGKOK

4.2.1 BANGKOK NEIGHBOURHOOD

4.2.2 IDENTIFYING PROBLEMS ON SITE

5.0 EX-ANTE ASSESSMENT

6.0 IMPLEMENTATION

7.0 REFLECTION AND CONCLUSION

7.1 IMPLEMENTATION REFLECTION

7.2 CONCLUSION

8.0 REFERENCES

9.0 APPENDICES

II.

III.

IV.

V.

VI.

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

09

10

13

17

18

19

19

21

28

28

30

31

37

44

45

51

52

55

II

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to take this opportunity to show my gratitude to my supervisor,

Mr. Hugo Nowell who has assisted and guided me all the way through my major

research project. I would like to thanks planners from both, Urban Redevelopment

Authorities, Mr. Hengky Tay and Land Transport Authorities, Mrs. Yin Hui, for

kindly providing information about Singapore planning principles. I would also like

to express my gratitude to Assistant Professor Panit Pujinda, Professor Tarawut

Boonlua for advice and material about Bangkok urban and transport planning.

Finally, I give my warm thanks to colleagues, friends and family for all the support

and smiles throughout the project.

III

ABSTRACT

The urban and transport planning is path dependent decisions that can determine

the way city consumed energy and produce carbon. Sustainable transport is one

of the solutions. It could be achieved through automobile independency. One of

the cities that has been regarded as successful urban and transport planning for

automobile independency is Singapore.

This research studies the possibility for the transferability of Singapore urban

strategy for automobile independency to Bangkok. It aims to find possible obstacles

and advantages in transferring Singapore strategies which hopefully would benefit

other developing South East Asian cities. The research focuses on neighbourhood

scale strategy especially around interchange station. It studies planning background

of Singapore and Bangkok. Input initiatives from Singapore that assist reduction of

automobile dependency are identified. These initiatives serve toward the same

goal of increasing attractiveness of public transport over private vehicles through

improving accessibility to public transport, reducing the need for commuting and

thus discouraging automobile usage. Transfer exercise explore possible obstacles

and advantages of transferring these initiatives.

The exercise and study find that Singapore planning success is from the long

term visionary planning but also relies on public ownership of land and total control

of planning. Therefore the obstacles of strategy transfer are Bangkok’s lack of

power to control development and private ownership of the land.

All in all, the input initiatives may not be able to be implemented directly to

achieve the same intentions and level of success, but they could be transferred

with appropriate adaption. These initiatives studied are only a small part of the

larger level strategies that support one another to achieve the ultimate goal of

automobile independency.

IV

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1 : World urbanisation prospects

FIGURE 2 : Location map

FIGURE 3 : Overall research background

FIGURE 4 : Existing policy transfer framework

FIGURE 5 : Proposed framework

FIGURE 6 : Singapore rail transport network

FIGURE 7 : Singapore transport mode share

FIGURE 8 : Singapore government structure

FIGURE 9 : Singapore planning process

FIGURE 10 : Bangkok transport mode share

FIGURE 11 : Bangkok rail transport network

FIGURE 12 : Bangkok government structure

FIGURE 13 : Bangkok planning structure

FIGURE 14 : Singapore site location

FIGURE 15 : Bishan arial view

02

03

04

07

08

10

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

19

19

FIGURE 16 : Bishan land use map

FIGURE 17 : Bishan strategy

FIGURE 18 : Bishan integrated hub conceptual section

FIGURE 19 : Bishan bus system

FIGURE 20 : Bishan integrated hub concept

FIGURE 21 : Bishan amenities

FIGURE 22 : Bishan permeability figure-ground

FIGURE 23 : Bishan HDB development

FIGURE 24 : Singapore input initiatives and intentions

FIGURE 25 : Bangkok site location

FIGURE 26 : Mochit arial view

FIGURE 27 : Mochit land use map

FIGURE 28 : Mochit problem

FIGURE 29 : Ex-ante assessment detial

FIGURE 30 : Mochit implementation of Singapore strategy

FIGURE 31 : Mochit integrated hub concept

FIGURE 32 : Mochit integrated hub conceptual section

FIGURE 33 : Mochit station - before implementation

FIGURE 34 : Mochit station - after implementation

FIGURE 35 : Mochit footpath and covered walkway

FIGURE 36 : Government office complex proposed implementation

FIGURE 37 : Reflection of implementation

20

21

22 & 40

23

23

24

25

26

27

28

28

29

30

33-36

38

39

40

41

41

42

43

46-49

V

LIST OF IMAGES by author or else specified

IMAGE 1 : Bishan view from Bishan park, on the north of the site

IMAGE 2 : HDB Complex

IMAGE 3 : MRT entrance connect directly to the shopping centre

IMAGE 4 : Commercial corridor connection to MRT - open at night

IMAGE 5 : Bishan bus interchange

IMAGE 6 : Shops on ground floor around HDB

IMAGE 7 : Shopping on ground floor

IMAGE 8 : Food court in the area

IMAGE 9 : Bishan community centre

IMAGE 10 : Bishan public library

IMAGE 11 : Elevated ground floor of HDB

IMAGE 12 : Covered walkway connect directly to bus stops

IMAGE 13 : Covered walkway connect directly to bus stops

IMAGE 14 : Covered walkway between HDB buildings

IMAGE 15 : HDB on-ground parking

IMAGE 16 : Pedestrian accesses to HDB complex

IMAGE 17 : Parking area adjacent to Mochit BTS station

IMAGE 18 : Street atmosphere

IMAGE 19 : Disconnected between BTS and MRT stations

IMAGE 20 : Chaotic conditions in Mochit

IMAGE 21 : Bus queuing at Mochit

20

20

22

22

22

23

23

24

24

24

25

25

25

26

26

26

29

29

30

30

30

VI

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

BMCL - Bangkok Metro public Company Limited

BTS - Bangkok mass Transit System

BTSC - Bangkok mass Transit System public Company limited

CBD - Central Business District

CTE - Central Expressway

DPT - Department of Public works and Town & country planning

LRT - Light Rail Transit

LTA - Land Transport Authority

MND - Ministry of National Development

MOI - Ministry of Interior

MOT - Ministry of Transprot

MRT - Mass Rapid Transit

MRTA - Mass Rapid Transit Authority of Thailand

NEA - National Environment Agency

NESDB - National Economic and Social Development Board

NPark - National Parks board

PWD - Public Works Department

SLA - Singapore Land Authority

SRT - State Railway of Thailand

STDZ - Sustainable Transport Development Zone

URA - Urban Redevelopment Authority

INTRO COVER

INTRODUCTION1.0

02

1.1 BACKGROUND

Many Asian cities especially, that in South East Asia, are rapidly being urbanized.

New or expanding cities subsequently require urban planning to cater to such

rapid population increases (Han, 2010). The decisions generated in this planning

process are path-dependency, and may potentially lead to lock-in systems that

may determine the ways in which cities consume energy and produce carbon.

One significant urban planning decision that has impactful consequences that are

beginning to concern many Asian cities is that of transport planning. As Newman &

Kenworthy stated, ‘Many cities in the developing world…are rapidly modernizing

with significant car ownership and are putting most of their transport capital

into new roads and parking. These cities have huge traffic problems as well as

associated environmental and social problem.’ (1996).

Perhaps the solution for this is sustainable transport, which can be achieve

through the organization of land use and transport planning (European Commission,

2003). One of the ways to pursue sustainable transport is automobile independent

mobility, which will be the main focus of this paper.

‘Automobile dependence is the primary force driving cities to increase their

use of land, energy, water, and other materials; their production of transportation

related air emissions, traffic noise, and storm water pollution; and their

economic problems due to the high capital costs of sprawl-related infrastructure,

direct transportation costs, and indirect transportation costs; along with the

transportation-related loss of the public realm, safety, and community.’ (Newman&

Kenworthy, 1999)

This could be achieved through ensuring that public transportation

infrastructures, which can mobilise large groups of people with less environmental

impact, is more attractive than personal automobiles (Newman & Kenworthy,

1996).

Singapore is one outstanding city that has successfully implemented a

sustainable urban transport program, especially amongst its neighbouring countries

in the region (Newman & Kenworthy, 1996; Newman & Kenworthy, 1989; Barter,

2008; Han, 2010; Newman & Kenworthy, 1999). Singapore was ranked second in the

Global Competitiveness Index in the 2013 World Economic Forum’s report which

had claimed that Singapore’s world-class infrastructure is a major contributor of

its success (Bin, 2013).

In the contrary, other neighbouring countries in the South East Asian region is

lacking of such system. Bangkok is one of the cities with urban problems, especially

with that of personal automobile dependency and traffic caused by unplanned

developments (Braun, 2011; Gibson, 2011; Kenworthy, 1995; Newman & Kenworthy,

1996; Newman & Kenworthy, 1989). Nearly seven million vehicles traverse the

streets of Bangkok everyday (Manager, ASTV, 2012). It is one of the most congested

cities in the world (Chumsri, 2013), regardless of mass transit expansions, there are

still increasing numbers of private motor vehicles.

Unlike Bangkok, Singapore has managed to ensure that its public transport

system is a better travel option through integrated land use and transport planning

as well as economic measures (Newman & Kenworthy, 1996; Bin, 2013; URA, 2014a;

LTA, 2013a; Han, 2010). With the underlying basis of Udomsri & Miyamoto who had

claimed that integrated planning is much more important for developing cities

rather than for developed cities (1995), the study of how Singapore’s planning

principle can be transferred to assist Bangkok’s own planning to achieve automobile

independency will be beneficial for Bangkok as well as for other cities in the South

East Asian region.

FIGURE 1 : World urbanization prospects (Source: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs)

03

‘..transforming the island-state from a chaotic ‘third-world’ country without adequate housing, basic sanitation and infrastructure in the 1960’s, to the

gleaming, efficient, well-run city it is today.’ (Bin, 2013)

FIGURE 2 : Location map (Modified from; Map of Asia with Countries - Single Colour by FreeVectorMaps.com)

1.2 RESEARCH QUESTION AND OBJECTIVES

The previous section has led to the research question of, Can Singapore’s

urban strategy for automobile independency be transferred to Bangkok?

Through transfer exercise, the research aims to achieve the following objective:

• To understand the context of sustainable transport in Singapore.

• To explore the possible obstacles and advantages of the transferring strategy.

• To explore how transfers could be accomplished.

This research project does not aim to solve Bangkok’s problems but, rather,

to illustrate transferability of Singapore’s strategies through the process of

implementing such strategies in Bangkok. These would aid in laying a substantial

foundation to further exploration in the transferability to other developing Asian

cities.

It may be argued that transferring to Bangkok cannot draw conclusion to the

transferability of Singapore’s strategy. However, single city study instead of array of

studies allows the project to explore the transferring process in the organizational

way (Inkpen & Pien, 2006). This, in its place, provides better understanding of

obstacles and modification occur during the process which will assist the future

strategy transfer practice.

Moreover, urban planning covers both large and small scales and are both

inevitably needed to be discussed as they are interrelated. The research will explore

large scale strategies but will focus the study on the scale of neighbourhoods.

The project will study the transferability of strategies in small areas of Singapore

to similar areas in Bangkok and identify specific strategies and adjustments that

will be needed. The strategy for interchange areas is the focus because Bangkok

already has high levels of demand for public transportations which are currently

served by road-based transports, such as the likes of buses and vans. To further

support Bangkok’s mass rail transit expansion plans, the strategy in interchange

areas will help to encourage people to use more mass rail transit modes and reduce

the use of private automobiles and road-based public transports in order to reduce

automobile dependency.

Singapore

Bangkok

041.3 OUTLINE

The next chapter will outline the literature and materials on urban planning

and sustainable transport developments in Singapore and Bangkok as well as

methodology formulated from the mentioned materials. Chapter three will explore

the overview of Singapore and Bangkok’s urban and transport planning to help

establish the background for further explorations. Following this, the research

will examine Singapore and Bangkok’s transport interchange areas in the city

fringes. The strategy from Singapore’s area will be outlined as an ‘input strategy’

and Bangkok’s problems in the selected area will be investigated. Chapter Five

will provide a quick assessment of the input strategies against the background

information to formulate possible ‘output strategies’ for Bangkok’s selected area.

Finally, the last chapter will reflect on the transfer processes in Chapter Six which

will help draw conclusions to the research question.

Developing cities

SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT

AUTOMOBILE INDEPENDENCY

SHIFT FROM PRIVATE VEHICLES TO PUBLIC TRANSPORT

MAKE PUBLIC TRANSPORT MORE ATTRACTIVE THAN PRIVATE VEHICLES

SINGAPORE’S GOALS

SINGAPORE’S STRATEGIES

?

FIGURE 3 : Overall research background

MATERIAL AND FRAMEWORK2.0

06

2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW

The materials about sustainable transport planning and automobile dependency

provide background research into the strategies of transfer principles and

goals. The policy transfer literature are reviewed to help formulate appropriate

methodologies for this research while information in planning in the source city of

Singapore and the target city of Bangkok, are also needed for the transfer exercise.

Newman & Kenworthy (1999) has related automobile dependence to

sustainability through linking it to many indicators for a sustainable city. They

concluded that ‘patterns of automobile dependence are not sustainable’ and

that, ‘it is not possible to solve sustainability in cities without addressing

automobile dependence.’ The authors (1989) studied cities around the world and

determined characteristics of policy to support automobile independency as Re-

urbanisation; intensive and centralized land use, and Reorientation of transport

priority; reorientation transport infrastructure to non-automobile modes, better

performing public transport and restraint on high speed traffic flow, or in other

words, integrated urban and transport planning. These are the basic characteristics

which Singapore’s strategies resembles. They (1996) suggested the encouragement

of people to turn from private vehicles to public transports through ensuring

that public transports is more attractive than personal automobiles to achieve

automobile independency. This is one of the main goals in Singapore urban and

transport planning (LTA, 2013a; URA, 2014d).

The research would explore strategies implemented by Singapore to enhance

attractiveness of public transports over private vehicular uses and the transferability

of these strategies to other developing cities. Macário & Marques (2008) provided

the framework and methodology for transferring best practices with the aim of

solving problems in the target city, using existing solutions from the source city.

The paper provided ten steps of policy transfer which will be adopted in the

following section for this paper. The framework is looking for the ‘preconditions for

implementation’ and the transferability was said to depend on ‘the characteristics

of measures themselves in relations to the target city’. This will be illustrated in

this research through the implementation.

The European Commission (2003) had stressed the significance of integrated

land use and transport policy, and emphasized on the transferring of these good

practices amongst European countries by pointing out barriers and solutions with

regards to policy transfers. The barriers could occur during three stages of the

transferring process, i.e. policy input, policy output and policy outcome. Policy

output is the ‘end product of policy formulation and implementation’ while policy

outcome is the ‘result of what happens…once the policy has been in operation for

some time’. As the policy outcome could not be determined within the scope of

this research, the output will be assessed in relations to the initial policy input’s

goals.

Stone suggested (1999) that ‘agency and structure factors will condition the

degree of transfer and the character of implementation’. Macário & Marques

(2008) also emphasized the significance of relationships between institutions,

clusters of strategies that support one another as success factors, ‘some of the

relationships between institutions and territories may have to be replicated as

well’. Likewise, the European Commission (2003) identified the importance of

‘understand(-ing) how a policy instrument may fit into the context of the receptor

city’. Inkpen & Pien (2006) also suggested that knowledge transfer alone without

elements supporting it will not serve the purposes. The aforementioned scholars

advocates that policy transfer could not happen solitarily, therefore to execute

the transfer exercise, ‘detailed understanding of its enabling context’ should be

achieved (Macário & Marques, 2008).

Singapore is regarded as a successful automobile independency role model

city from its urban planning and economic control of the cars ownerships whereas

Bangkok is known for its traffic problems from unplanned and uncoordinated

government and planning system.

Singapore has been mentioned as a good model for planning with regards to

automobile independency in several literatures (Newman & Kenworthy, 1996;

Gibson, 2011; Han, 2010). Han (2010) stated that Singapore’s success should be

adopted in South East Asian cities. However, known alongside Singapore’s planning

success is its uniqueness of motivation. Wong & Goldblum (2008), Tan (1999) and

all publications from Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) stressed on Singapore’s

outstanding urban planning motivation as spatial limitation. Barter (2008), in

particular, claimed that the sustainable urban transport systems of Singapore is, in

fact, ‘spatial and economic efficiency-focused’.

In contrast, neighbouring cities like Bangkok is well-known for its traffic

problems resulting from ineffective urban and transport planning (Pianuan, et

al.,1994; Braun, 2011; Tanaboriboon, 1993; Udomsri & Miyamoto, 1995; Kenworthy,

1995; Gibson, 2011; Newman & Kenworthy, 1996; Nims, 1963). Bangkok and

Vicinities Regional Plan 2056 has outlined for upcoming mass rail transit extensions

(DPT, 2006), new transport nodes are being proposed and constructed. Boonlua

(2008) stated the benefits of having ‘Sustainable Transport Development Zone’

(STDZ) around transport nodes in developing cities especially in dense urban fabric

suitable for walking like Bangkok.

The research will study if Singapore’s strategy for automobile dependency

can be effectively transferred to benefit other developing cities like Bangkok.

Existing potentials in Bangkok’s urban fabric and its mass rail transit plans

indicate possibilities to increase the attractiveness of public transport through

neighbourhood strategies. The information of source and target cities, together

with the transfer exercise, will be used in determining whether the transferability

of Singapore urban planning strategy for automobile independency to Bangkok is

viable.

2.2 TRANSFERABILITY OF TRANSPORT MEASURES

FRAMEWORK

The existing framework shown in FIGURE 4 from Transferability of Sustainable

Urban Mobility Measures suggests the method of transferring transport policy from

one city to another. It aims to solve the problems in the target city, and allow

each measure clusters’ transferability to be assessed (Macário & Marques, 2008).

Therefore, the framework assesses the transferability of a strategy through its

ability to solve target city’s problems.

However, this research focuses on the idea of using the source city as a model

and to explore the strategy transfer through the process of adoption. It also aims

to discover whether Singapore’s strategies can be effectively and appropriately

transferred to Bangkok in order to achieve automobile independence. Therefore,

the framework is adjusted, as shown in FIGURE 5.

The process will start with the study of the source and city targets (Singapore

and Bangkok), and then the ‘input initiatives’ from the source city will be identified

for the transfer exercise. Pre-assessments are performed to determine possible

‘output initiatives’ before actual implementations. Finally, the implementation

will be reflected on and concluded.

This method will allow the paper to observe transferability of Singapore’s strategies

that will aid in the reduction of automobile dependency. The transfer exercise

transforms the input strategies from Singapore into the output strategies that will

and can be implemented in Bangkok. However, the outcome of the strategies of

transfer can only be assessed when the transfer strategy has taken place and put

into full motion (European Commission, 2003). This requirement is beyond the

scope of this research.

07

STEP 1 : Diagnostic of the Problems

STEP 4 : Look Around for Similar Contexts

STEP 2 : Characterisation of the City

STEP 5 : Selecting Examples of Origin Urban Contexts

STEP 3 : Analysis of the city context and implication of problems identified

STEP 6 : Identify Measures with Potential for Transferring

STEP 7 : Packaging & Dimensioning the Measures for Transferring

STEP 8 : Ex-ante Assessment of Measures to Transfer

STEP 9 : Identify Need for Adjustment

STEP 10 : Implement Measures and Steer Results

Need to Adjust?

No

Yes

FIGURE 4 : Existing policy transfer framework (Macário & Marques, 2008)

08

REFLECTION OF IMPLEMENTATION

CONCLUSION

7. Transferability

Overtime

SINGAPORE PLANNING BACKGROUND

BANGKOK PLANNING BACKGROUND

SINGAPORE SELECTED AREA

INPUT INITIATIVES

APPLICATION TO THE SITE OUTCOMEOUTPUT INITIATIVES

BANGKOK SELECTED AREA

2. Identify Source City

1. Identify the Issue

Research scope

6. Implementation

TRANSFER EXERCISE

5. Ex-ante Assessment

3. Identify Target City

SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT

AUTOMOBILE INDEPENDENCY

SHIFT FROM PRIVATE VEHICLES TO PUBLIC TRANSPORT

MAKE PUBLIC TRANSPORT MORE ATTRACTIVE THAN PRIVATE VEHICLES

GOALS/INTENTIONS

FIGURE 5 : Proposed framework

4. Identify Strategies from Source City

PLANNING OVERVIEW3.0

10

3.1 SINGAPORE PLANNING OVERVIEW

Singapore’s success has been acclaimed by many articles. One of the major successes

of Singapore is the ability to sustain the growth of private vehicle numbers while

also having public transport usage of up to 63% (LTA, 2013b). FIGURE 7 illustrates

the city’s mode share in 2010. This results from the combination of urban and

transport planning as well as the implementation of economic mechanisms to

regulate private motor vehicles such as auctions for the Certificate of Entitlement

(COE) for private vehicles and congestion charges (Newman & Kenworthy, 1996;

Han, 2010). However, this research will focus on the physical urban and transport

planning processes.

FIGURE 6 : Singapore rail transport network

Existing rail service

Planned rail service

‘…public transport will have to be the main mode of travel in Singapore. It is the most space-efficient and environmentally sustainable option.’

(Hui, 2014)

General Context

Singapore is a city-state island located at the southern tip of the Malaysian

Peninsula (FIGURE 2). The country has a tropical climate with an average temperature

in 2013 between 25OC to 31OC and a relative humidity of 81.7%. With no distinct

seasons, where only monsoon and non-monsoon conditions are prevalent, in 2013

Singapore has 206 rainy days, which produced a total rainfall of 2,748.4 mm (NEA,

2014). The city has an area of 716.1km2, with a total population of 5.4 million

people. It is a high density city of 7,540 people per km2 (Singapore Department

of Statistic, 2014). The country has a low car ownership rate at approximately 99

cars/ 1000 people with an overall of 969,910 vehicles on the streets (LTA, 2013c).

Singapore’s average income is SGD 5,108/month or £2,454/month (IECONOMICS,

2014; converted on 17 August 2014).

It currently has five Mass Rapid Transit lines (MRT) and three Light Rail Transit

lines (LRT) across the island, with extension plans for up to nine lines by 2030

(FIGURE 6), together with plans to improve service quality and increase number of

bus lines. This will raise Singapore’s rail length density to 43 km/million population,

which will be an equivalent figure to London today (LTA, 2013a). Public transport

fares are calculated by distances regardless of modes. The maximum fair per trip

for up to six changes in two hours is SGD 2.9 or £1.38 (Public Transport Council,

2014). It is estimated that owning a car can cost 26 times more than using MRT in

a year (Ong, 2011).

ROAD BASED

NON-ROAD BA

SED

Private

Cycl

e

Bus

Wal

k

Taxi

Rail

FIGURE 7 : Singapore transport mode share (LTA, 2010)

Cabinet

Prime Minister

Other MinistriesMinistry of National Development

Government Departments

Government Departments

Public Works Department

Housing and Development Board

Construction Industry

Development Board

Parks & Recreation Department

Urban Redevelopment

Authority

Professional Engineers Board

Primary Production Department

National Parks Board Board of Architects

Computer Information Department

Preservation of Monuments Board

Statutory Boards

Statutory Boards

11

Government System

Singapore is a single tier city in FIGURE 8 (base on NG, 1999). The Ministry of

National Development (MND) is responsible for physical development and planning

in the country. Most of the urban planning is done through the Urban Redevelopment

Authority (URA) statutory board in cooperation with other ministries especially that

of the Land transport Authority (LTA) statutory board from the Ministry of Transport

(MOT) (Ng, 1999). Planning permit is reviewed by planners in the development

control division under URA (URA, 2014a). ‘There is close collaboration between

URA and the Land Transport Authority (LTA) in drawing up our land use plans.

This ensures that the transportation network is well integrated with land use

development.’ (URA, 2014c)

FIGURE 8 : Singapore government structure (Base on Ng,1999)

Survey & Collect Data

Analyse Data

Develop Outline Plan

Public Exhibition/Dialogue

Refine Plan into ProposalExhibit Proposal

Finalise the Proposal

Gazette the New Master Plan

Monitor & Review

12

Integrated Planning

Singapore’s success can be traced back to its unifying development. This is

guided by the concept plan with regards to the strategic land use and transport

plan which gives direction to the overall development for the next 40-50 years Bin,

2013; Tan, 1999). Starting in 1971, the concept plan has been reviewed every five

to ten years to ensure that the direction of development meets the evolving needs

of Singapore. The plan is then translated into the master plan which helps control

private development through the Planning Act.

The most recent Concept Plan 2011 addresses both population and economic

growth by focusing on sustaining high quality living environment for expected

population of up to 6.9 million people by 2030. The latest Master Plan 2014

(APPENDIX A) together with the Transport Master Plan 2013 responds to the

Concept Plan 2011 by continuing the development of decentralized nodes with

amenities and identities, and creating better connections through rail expansions,

improving bus services and strengthening car restriction (LTA, 2013a; URA, 2014d;

Bin, 2013). Some new land use strategies proposed in the master plan are; Car

reduced districts to reduce dependency on private transport modes and fence-less

districts and covered link ways to encourage more walking towards public transport

modes (Tay, 2014).

The Singaporean government is not only in charge of national development,

but it also owns 58% of land (SLA, 2014), making them the main entrepreneur to

drive economic and land development, and therefore planners has few problems

implementing their plan (Ng, 1999). The concept plan and master plan can therefore

be implemented and visible within 5-10 years (Tan, 1999). The transparent system

of the planning shown in FIGURE 9, together with high social order as a ‘regulated

society’, results in the citizens having high trust in the government (Ng, 1999).

However, it shall be noted that the drivers of Singapore planning are very

distinctive. Urban and transport planning have always been responding to

globalization and limited resources (Wong & Goldblum, 2008). ‘We cannot just

walk away from mistakes made in our existing city and plan a new city. There

is simply no room to do so’ (Hean, 2008). Finance, road space and avoidance of

congestion have been the main arguments used when reviewing and formulating

overall spatial planning throughout the history (Barter, 2008).

FIGURE 9 : Singapore planning process (Base on Ng,1999)

13

ROAD BASEDPrivate Boat

Bus

Rail

Van/Private

bus

FIGURE 10 : Bangkok transport mode share (NESDB, 2009)

3.2 BANGKOK PLANNING OVERVIEW

Previous Bangkok’s non-organised land use planning has been the roots of many

problems such as conflicts between land usage and low density urban sprawl and

into green and agricultural field (DPT, 2006). In 1972, the choice of expressway

over public transport due to technical and operational complications and financial

benefits have resulted in the creation of a lock-in system towards private vehicle

mobility (Pianuan, et al., 1994). These have led Bangkok to the point where it is

internationally recognised as a metropolis that is suffering from a severe congestion

(Gibson, 2011, cited from Gwilliam, 2002).

Average traffic speeds around the central business district (CBD) were 10.36-12.5

km/hr (Limpaiboon, 2010) and even slower during morning and evening peaks. This

traffic is estimated to cost roughly US$6.52 billion or £3.83 billion per year (Gibson,

2011; converted on 17 August 2014). Public transport mode share in Bangkok is at

44%, which is relatively high in comparison to Singapore (Gibson, 2011). However, it

is noted that the majority of these are road base transport – buses and vans, which

contributes to the jam-packed street. FIGURE 10 shows mode share in 2009. The

failure of Bangkok caused by unplanned development with no policies to enforce

the plan (Udomsri & Miyamoto, 1995) will be explained in the following section.

14

General Context

Bangkok is the capital and primate city of Thailand (Gibson, 2011), and is located

at the centre of the Indochina peninsula (FIGURE 2). The city has a similar tropical

climate to that of Singapore, with an average temperature in 2012, between 26OC

to 34OC and a relative humidity of 76%. In 2012, Bangkok has 133 rainy days, which

yielded a total rainfall of 1,656.3 mm (National Statistical Office, 2013).

Bangkok has an area of 1,565.2 km2 with a registered population of approximately

5.69 million people, bringing the density to 3,633 people/km2 (General Register

Office, 2014). However, it is estimated that there are over eight million people

living in Bangkok and over 14 million living in the vicinity provinces (FIP Congresses

and Conferences, 2014). The land within 10km of the city centre has a density as

high as 14,738 people/km2 (Gibson, 2011 cited from Boonlua, 2007). The rate of

car ownerships can be calculated to 752 individual vehicles/1000 people (National

Statistical Office, 2013), more than seven times that of Singapore.

The average income in Bangkok is THB 12,772/month or £239/month

(IECONOMICS, 2014; converted on 17 August 2014).

Several articles have mentioned the need of a rail mass transit system in

Bangkok (Nims, 1963; Kenworthy, 1995; Pianuan, et al., 1994; Tanaboriboon, 1993)

which has been realised. The Bangkok mass Transit System or widely known as BTS

is an elevated sky train. It presently consists of two lines. One starts at Mochit and

runs into the city centre all the way to the south of Bangkok. Built and operated

by the Bangkok Mass Transit System Public Company Limited (BTSC), the project is

privately owned (BTSC, 2011). The MRT project is another rail mass transit system.

It is a cooperation between the private enterprise, the Bangkok Metro Public

Company Limited (BMCL) and the public, Mass Rapid Transit Authority of Thailand

(MRTA) (BMCL, 2005). MRT has one line that goes into the CBD. The expansion of

the system is, at present, under construction, into Bangkok’s vicinity as well as

the city’s old town. The transit lines proposed in the latest Bangkok and Vicinities

Regional Plan 2056 will give a total distance of 291 km (Gibson, 2011), compared

to the figure of 376 km in Singapore (FIGURE 11).

Public transport fares vary by modes. Sky train and Underground system can

cost up to THB 52 per trip (£0.98), while buses have a maximum flat fair at THB 12

(£0.23) or maximum distance fare at THB 25 (£0.47), while vans can cost up to THB

50 per trip (£0.95) (Transit Bangkok, 2012 ; converted on 17 August 2014).

FIGURE 11 : Bangkok rail transport network

Existing rail service

Planned rail service

Government System

The National Economic and Social Development Board (NESDB) is responsible

for the overall national development policy plan. The Department of Public Works

and Town & Country Planning (DPT) under the Ministry of Interior (MOI) formulates

spatial plans following the policy framework set by the NESDB (FIGURE 12). The

plan is to be followed by different departments in operation (Sakkayarojkol, 2013),

but as these departments are under different ministries, the DPT does not have

the authority to exercise control and management over all of them (Pujinda,

2014). Unlike Singapore, the construction permit is reviewed by the Public Works

Departments (PWD) in district offices with no coordination with city planners in the

DPT (Gibson, 2011).

Cabinet Prime minister

Central Administration

ProvincesBureauOther MinistriesThe Prime Minister’s Office

DepartmentsDepartmentsDepartmentsAdministrative Directly under PM

National Economic & Social Development Board (NESDB)

Department of Public Works and Town &

Country Planning (DPT)

Ministry of Interior Provincial Administrative Organisation

Bangkok Metropolitan

AdministrationPattaya City

MunicipalitySub-District

Administrative Organisation

Districts

Sub-Districts

Villages

Provincial Administration Local Administration

15

FIGURE 12 : Bangkok government structure (Base on Sakkayarojkol, 2013)

Integrated Planning

The National Economic and Social Development Plan by NESDB is a policy

framework for all developments. The DPT is then responsible for producing spatial

plans at different levels as shown in FIGURE 13.

Thailand has a strategic location in South East Asia. It has high potential for

connection by land and water routes with Bangkok at the very centre. The New

National Development Plan has recognised and utilised this in the main framework

(Infrastructural Strategy Division, 2006). The latest Bangkok and Vicinities Regional

Plan 2056 (APPENDIX B) focuses on the control of growth and sprawl through

sustainable development. This is done through good connections and balance

between urban and rural area. The main strategies are decentralisation from

Bangkok and a better connection with the choice of transport especially that of

mass rail network (DPT, 2006).

The identification of problems and solutions are not issues for Bangkok’s urban

and transport planning, but rather slow progress of implementation and lack of

funding are the key obstacles to success (Udomsri & Miyamoto, 1995; Tanaboriboon,

1993; Gibson, 2011). This could be because the organisational structure of the

institution does not allow for the process of implementation to easily happen as

shown in FIGURE 12 (Infrastructural Strategy Division, 2006). While Singapore has

a holistic approach to the problems at hand, Bangkok tends to use an isolated

‘showcase project’ (Wong & Goldblum, 2008) and therefore it is suggested that

systematic coordination is needed (Pianuan, et al., 1994; Kenworthy, 1995; Nims,

1963). ‘There is no appropriate connection between city planning and transport

planning…People responsible for transport infrastructure only plan with the

perspective of transport without consideration of urban planning and consider

only current land use without future possibilities.’ (Pujinda, 2014). However,

unplanned development has created a mixed-use urban fabric for Bangkok which is

suitable for walking (Boonlua, 2008), but nevertheless, transport accessibility does

not match the urban density (Braun, 2011) with no incentive for people to move

away from their independence on private vehicles.

Therefore, Singapore’s strategy has the potential to help remedy Bangkok and

other developing cities’ urban problems. With the proposed mass rail transits’

plan, urban planning on the level of neighbourhoods will help with maximising the

effectiveness of public transportation modes and henceforth reduce automobile

dependency.

‘We (Thais) do not understand that city planning is the integrated development that all agencies need to do it together’

(Pujinda, 2014)

National Plan

Regional Plan

Sub-regional Plan

Water Shed Plan

District Plan

Provincial Comprehensive Plan Development Plan

Development Plan

Development Plan

Town Comprehensive Plan

Specific Plan

Land Readjustment Plan

POLICY PLAN

Nat

iona

lRe

gion

alSu

b-re

gion

alPr

ovin

cial

Tow

nSp

ecifi

c Ar

ea

LAW ENFORCEMENT

DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINE

16

FIGURE 13 : Bangkok planning structure (Base on Sakkayarojkol, 2013)

17

3.3 SUMMARY COMPARISON DIAGRAM

716 KM2

5.4 MILLIONS

7,540 PPL/ KM2

25OC TO 31OC

99 CARS/1000 PPL

£2,454/MONTH

26OC TO 34OC

752 CARS/ 1000 PPL

£239/MONTH

£1.38/TRIP £0.98/TRIP

206 RAINY DAYS 133 RAINY DAYS

1,565 KM2

~ 8 MILLIONS

~ 5,112 PPL/KM2

BANGKOKSINGAPORE

$

$

ROAD BASEDPrivate Boat

Bus

Rail

Van/Private

bus

ROAD BASED

NON-ROAD BA

SED

Private

Cycl

e

Bus

Wal

k

Taxi

Rail

3.3 PLANNING OVERVIEW IN BRIEF

PLANNING AT NEIGHBOURHOOD LEVEL4.0

19

FIGURE 15 : Bishan aerial view (Source : Google Map)

FIGURE 14 : Singapore site location

Existing rail service

Planned rail service

Interchange nodes

CBD

Site

4.1 SINGAPORE

4.1.1 SINGAPORE NEIGHBOURHOOD

This research will focus on the Bishan interchange area which is in the central

region of Singapore. It is selected because of its fringe location which has the

potential to accommodate expansion from the central area while also functioning

as the connector between inner and outer cities with its inter-modal transport

changes.

Bishan is ‘…established towns with attractive housing, vibrant commercial nodes and a diverse

range of amenities.’ (URA, 2013)

250 M

100 M

20

FIGURE 16 : Bishan land use map

IMAGE 1 : Bishan view from Bishan park, on the north of the site (Source: wordpress, photo by gerbenji)

MRT Interchange main entrance

Junction 8 shopping centre

Bus interchange

Bus stops

Water body

Geographic and Land Use

Bishan is approximately 11 km from the Central Business District (CBD). The

whole district is seven km2 with a population of approximately 75,000 residents.

It consists primarily of housing estates, and the total numbers of flats are around

19,000 units (Street Directory, 2014). There is still a plan for Bishan to be more

compact through infill of the reserved land (More information on Reserved Land

strategy in APPENDIX I). ‘More than 10,000 housing units of more than 30 storeys

will be injected in vacant lands around the MRT stations like…Bishan in the next

decade and beyond’ (URA, 2012).

The east side of the site is mainly occupied by public housing estates called

HDB. They are invested, owned and operated by the government while the west

part is mostly landed house, consisting of terrace, semi-detached and detached

houses. The area is also scattered with amenities such as schools, sport complexes,

shopping centres and parks (FIGURE 16).

Transit Locations and Network

The site is located at the Bishan MRT station where the North-South Line and

the Circle Line interchanges. These connect the site with city centres as well as

the north and west regions of Singapore. Next to MRT station is also the Bishan

bus interchange with 10 transit buses (Street Directory, 2014). The area is linked

with the rest of Singapore through the Central Expressway (CTE) which is located

towards the east zone of the site, easily accessed through Braddell road in the

South.

IMAGE 2 : HDB complex

Bish

an R

d.

Braddell Rd.

To CTE

To A

ng M

o Ki

o

250 M

100 M

21

4.1.2 IDENTIFYING THE STRATEGY ON SITE

Analysing Bishan through the perspective of literatures and Singapore

development plan, the input initiatives the site performs to achieve automobile

independency are identified (FIGURE 17). The intentions of these input initiatives

are also acknowledged for further transferability assessment.

Integrated Transit

Public Amenity

Recreational Space

Covered Walkway

Minimal Roads for Development

Limited Parking

Commercialisation on Ground Floor

Integrated Ticket System

Always Footpath

FIGURE 17 : Bishan strategy

‘Our towns will continue to meet a variety of needs, provide well-placed and comprehensive amenities, abundant green spaces and recreational choices, as well

as convenient access to public transport.’(URA, 2014)

250 M

100 M

22

The Bishan station integrates two MRT lines and connects to the Bishan bus

interchange. The commercial space is introduced to provide commuters with

amenities, facilities and entertainment. MRT commuters can directly interchange

between lines in the same station or exit onto the mall above the station to

enjoy commercial areas before heading home or to other destinations by way of

buses (FIGURE 18). These provide convenience for public transport commuters,

emphasising non-motorised transport infrastructure modes (Newman & Kenworthy,

1989).

Integrated Transit

FIGURE 18 : Bishan integrated hub conceptual section

RESIDENTIAL

RR R RRRRR

RESIDENTIALRESIDENTIAL

MRT

BUS INTERCHANGEBUSBUS

FOOD COURT

PARKING

SUPERMARKET

SHOPS COMMUNITY CENTRE

CINEMA FOOD HALL

OFFICE

RESIDENTIAL

MRT Exist

IMAGE 3 : MRT entrance connect directly to the shopping centre

IMAGE 4 : Commercial corridor connection to MRT - open at night

IMAGE 5 : Bishan bus interchange

Integrated Ticket System

Singapore’s Ezylink card allows commuters to pay for all public transports with

discounts over cash. It can also be used as a cash card in some stores and on taxis.

Commuters can switch their travel modes easily to reach their destinations.

‘…we are transforming our interchanges and stations into lifestyle hubs where commuters can shop and have a meal before hopping on the train or bus to their next

destination.’ (LTA, 2013)

23

Ground floor commercial

Commercial

Transit

Bus stops

Bus route

FIGURE 19 : Bishan bus system

Commercialisation on Ground Floor

Commercialisation on the ground floor of the HDB and offices around the

interchange station creates a rather lively environment for commuters walking to

and from the station. It intensifies land use and improves day-to-day convenience

for the neighbourhood, henceforth reducing the demand for travelling (Newman &

Kenworthy, 1989).

IMAGE 6 : Shops on ground floor around HDB IMAGE 7 : Shopping on ground floor

MRT on ground Exist

MRT under ground Exist

MRT under ground Station

FIGURE 20 : Bishan integrated hub concept

250 M

100 M

50 M

24

FIGURE 21 : Bishan amenities

‘Forward-thinking, creative town planning provides for a wide range of amenities including retail shops, hawker centres, childcare centres, places of worship,

healthcare facilities and community clubs, and distributes these amenities throughout the estate for

the easy access of residents.’(URA, 2014)

Bus stops

Food Court

Singapore’s goal of creating a better quality of life (URA, 2014a) has given

public facilities and recreational space important roles in planning (FIGURE 21).

The HDB complexes are scattered with basketball courts, skateboard parks,

community spaces, playgrounds and exercise grounds. Nurseries and local schools

can be easily by foot from the station. There are also churches and mosques to

cater to Singapore’s diverse cultures. These works together in order to create a

liveable city making it true ‘suburban living’ (URA, 2014d) and reducing demands

for travelling (Newman & Kenworthy, 1989).

Recreational Space

Public Amenity

IMAGE 8 : Food court in the area IMAGE 9 : Bishan community centre

IMAGE 10 : Bishan public library (Source: Archdaily)

Bishan Sport Complex

Girl Guides Singapore

MOE Language Centre

St. Joseph’s Institution

Kuo Chuan Presbyterian Church & School

Sport Field

Bishan Home

Sport Field

Singapore ScoutAssociation

Guangyang Secondary

School

Sport Field

Bishan Community

CentreBishan PublicLibrary

Cemetry Building

Zion Bishan Church

MasjidAn-Nahdhah

Bishan Depot(SMRT)

Masjis Ugama Islam

Islamic Religious Council

Catholic High School

Junction 8 Shopping Centre

250 M

100 M

25

Gated property

HDB with free ground floor space

Impermeable ground floor

FIGURE 22 : Bishan permeability figure-ground

‘No one likes getting caught in the rain on the way to or from public transport hubs.’

(URA, 2014)

Covered Walkway

Always Footpath

Most of HDB buildings are elevated on the ground floor with strict prohibitions

of permanent activities, making the whole area permeable and suitable for

walking as shown in FIGURE 22 and IMAGE 11. Residents can conveniently access

public transport stops and stations by walking under the HDB buildings or covered

walkways. The latest Master Plan 2014 intends to extend the covered walkways

from 200m to 400m from transport nodes to further reach trips generation hubs

(URA, 2014d). This reorients urban infrastructure to support non-automobile mode

(Newman & Kenworthy, 1989).

The footpath is always provided within HDB development area and alongside

the roads with effective storm-water management. In private landed-house areas,

the setback regulation safeguards land for footpath on at least one side of the

street (IMAGE 13). The footpath is invested and maintained by the National Park

Board (NParks) and LTA (Wee, 2014).

IMAGE 11 : Elevated ground floor of HDB development IMAGE 12 : Covered walkway connect directly to bus stops

IMAGE 13 : Landed house neighbourhood

250 M

100 M

TO BE EDITED

26

Bus stops

Car entrance

Covered walkway

Pedestrian access

FIGURE 23: Bishan HDB development

‘We will make public transport an attractive mode of travel so that you will rely less on the personal car.’

(LTA, 2013)

There are limited car entrances to the HDB area while accessing the development

by foot from public transport stops or stations is more convenient, as illustrated

in FIGURE 23. The HDB development also has a limited number of charged parking

spaces for residents. These allows for the marginalisation of private vehicles in the

development.

Limited Parking

Minimal Roads for Development

IMAGE 14 : Covered walkway between HDB buildings

IMAGE 15 : HDB on-ground parking

IMAGE 16 : Pedestrian accesses to HDB complex

50 M

250 M

27

STRATEGIES INITIATIVES INTENTIONS

• Create better connection between public transport modes to encourage the use of public transport.

• Decentralise development.• Provided day-to-day convenience.• Minimise the requirement to commute.

• Reduce convenience of private automobile.

• Reduce space used for automobile infrastructure, create more land for other purposes.

• Provide convenience for commuters to change modes.

• Efficient boarding time. • Accurate fare charged.

• Enhance walking experience, make walking a better choice especially for tropical weather.

Mor

e Ci

vic

Spac

e

Wal

kabl

e Li

ving

Env

iron

men

t

Day

-to-

Day

Con

veni

enceOne

Sto

p H

ub

Car

Redu

ced

Resi

dent

ial A

rea

Wor

king

as

One

Analysing the intentions as in FIGURE 24, the inputs have the intention of

increasing accessibility to public transports, reducing the need of travelling and

discouraging automobile usage. These three intentions lead to the same goal,

which is to make public transport more attractive than private vehicle usage

(LTA, 2013a). This helps to contribute to the decrease of automobile dependency

that brings about sustainable transport (Newman & Kenworthy, 1996) as shown in

FIGURE 3. These input initiatives from the source city will be applied to target

cities in the transfer exercise.

FIGURE 24: Singapore input initiatives and intentions

Integrated Transit

Public Amenity

Recreational Space

Covered Walkway

Minimal Roads for Development

Limited Parking

Commercialisation on Ground Floor

Integrated Ticket System

Always Footpath

28

Existing rail service

Planned rail service

Interchange nodes

CBD

Site

4.2 BANGKOK

4.2.1 BANGKOK NEIGHBOURHOOD

The target area for Bangkok is the Mochit interchange area. It resembles Bishan

as an inter-modal transport interchange at the fringe of the city. Mochit is where

commuters interchange between two mass rail services, BTS and MRT. It is also

where they disseminate from, with the origin being at the city’s CBD. Here, they

also traverse other parts of Bangkok that is outside mass transit coverage area via

buses, vans and private vehicles. However, unlike Bishan, the services do not share

the same stations or have any proper integration typology.

FIGURE 25 : Bangkok site location

FIGURE 26 : Mochit aerial view (Source : Google Map)

‘...Bangkok large ‘footloose’ residential areas based predominantly on car access have been spreading

rapidly across the landscape in the 1980s and 1990s’ (Newman & Kenworthy, 1996)

250 M

100 M

29

FIGURE 27 : Mochit land use map

Bus stopsMRT entrances

Mochit BTS station

Chatujak MRT entrances

Geographic and Land Use

Mochit is located approximately 12 km from the CBD in the Chatujak district.

The whole district is 32 km2 with an average density of 5,363 people/km2 (Chatujak

District Office, 2013).

Refer to FIGURE 27, the west side of the site is mainly residential, consisting

of landed houses, condominiums as well as shop houses. Shop houses introduce

commercial elements to the ground floor, while office buildings are mainly located

along the main road. The areas are private owned, apart from the government office

complex of the Department of Land Transport and Civil Aviation Training Centre.

There is also a large parking space adjacent to the station on the land belonging

to State Railway of Thailand (SRT). It is currently used as a depot for BTS train

bogies. The parking lot is fully occupied by commuters driving to connect to public

transport at Mochit, and in turn this helps to reduce the number of motor vehicles

driven into the city centre. The east side of the sky train is mainly commercial, and

it also belongs to the SRT. The main element of the area (considered an attraction

as well) is the Chatujak Weekend Market, one of the world’s largest weekend

markets (Anon., 2010).

Transit Location and Network

Mochit BTS and Chatujak MRT stations connect to the city centre. Phahonyothin

Rd. has over 40 bus lines running through it while other fix-routed vans run from

both Phahonyothin and Kamphaeng Phet 3 Rd., connecting the area with outer

parts of Bangkok. There are also services of motorcycle taxis along Phahonyothin

Rd. to feed into small streets or ‘sois’ where buses cannot access. The Vibhavadi

Rangsit Rd. is the main road leading to northern parts of Thailand, passing Don

Muang Airport via the Don Muang Tollway for those who can afford to escape the

congested daily traffic. The tollway also connects to expressways for faster options

to accessing the CBD.

IMAGE 18 : Street atmosphereIMAGE 17 : Parking area adjacent to Mochit BTS stations (Source: Exploring Tourism)

To N

orth

of T

haila

nd

Phah

onyo

thin

Rd.

Kam

phae

ng P

het

2 Rd

.

Kam

phae

ng P

het

3 Rd

.

To c

ity

cent

re

To city centre

To North of Thailand &

DonM

uang Airport

Vibhavadi Rangsit Rd.

250 M

100 M

30

Depot : underused space

Impermeable development

Transit stations

Chatujak weekend market

Government office complex

Parks

Existing footpath

Bus route

Bus stop

Key destinations

Development block the access

Sois with street sholders

4.2.2 IDENTIFYING PROBLEMS ON SITE

While Singapore is trying to get the best out of their land (Tan, 1999), the

Mochit area has a large under-used space adjacent to the station. The valuable

land is now an on-ground parking, in front of a large depot. There are no certain

plans indicating the depot land is ‘reserved land’ for future needs. The BTS and

MRT stations on the site could have been linked, but they are still disconnected at

the moment. This demonstrates how projects in Bangkok are treated as isolated

projects without coordination with one another (Pianuan, et al., 1994). Unlike

Singapore where half of its land belongs to the government (SLA, 2014), Bangkok

lands are mostly private. Together with a weak planning act to control private

developments (Gibson, 2011), it is difficult to drive any development into intended

directions.

Moreover, the accessibility to and from public transports on the site is poor,

especially to reach residential areas, as shown in FIGURE 28. Buses, currently the

main public transport in Bangkok, only runs on the main streets and do not reach

any residential area. This is normal even in Singapore where bus routes do not enter

private residential streets. However, in Mochit, residents cannot easily reach the

transits due to big developments along the main streets (Gibson, 2011). The depot

and government office forms a wall, separating residents from transit stations.

To worsen the condition, the available walking infrastructure is not sufficient.

There are either blocked footpaths, or no footpath at all. Hence, the site becomes

impermeable.

As the accessibility to and from public transports is low, people becomes more

reliable of their own private vehicles (Newman & Kenworthy, 1999). Thus, parking

space is an essential part of any developments, and the lack of it further encourages

automobile dependency.

FIGURE 28 : Mochit problem

IMAGE 19 : Disconnected between BTS and MRT stations IMAGE 20 : Chaotic conditions in Mochit

IMAGE 21 : Bus queuing at Mochit (Source: Tasty Thailand)

250 M

100 M

05 EX-ANTE ASSESSMENT

EX-ANTE ASSESSMENT5.0

32

Integrated Transit

Integrated Ticket System

Commercialisation on Ground Floor

Bangkok’s tropical climate, which is similar to Singapore, could highly benefit

from covered walkways. The initiative should be implemented by creating a network

of covered walkways connecting buildings within the same developments as well

as connecting the key developments on the site together. These links between

trip generators would enhance the walking experience and hence improve public

transport convenience (URA, 2014d).

There are footpaths on the main streets with heavy pedestrian flows, but these

lack any proper infrastructure on smaller streets. The unplanned urban fabric of

Bangkok creates a mixed-use quality which is suitable for walking (Boonlua, 2008).

Therefore the initiative should be implemented to improve the existing footpath

routes. This will help introduce more footpaths in some smaller streets for better

accessibility to residential areas and support the existing mixed-use quality.

Bishan applies these initiatives in public residential developments. Thus they

could be implemented within the government office complex. These should be

done through reducing car access within the complex. The limited central parking

should be provided with the removal of on-ground parking spaces. These are meant

to marginalise private vehicles on the complex.

Public amenity is a new concept for Bangkok. Amenities such as public libraries

should be provided within the transit hub where residents can easily have access

to.

The initiative could take advantage of the adjacent parks on the site by

improving the accessibility to the parks.

Each transport mode in Bangkok has its own payment system. The initiative

should be implemented by introducing integrated ticket systems for all public

transports for convenience of inter-modal changes.

Mochit is already a busy interchange area with different modes of transit, but

these modes do not have proper connections to one another. The implementation

is to modify the under-used depot next to the BTS station into an integrated hub

that connects the BTS and MRT through commercial spaces and create a regulated

buses and vans terminal similar to those employed in Bishan. These would ensure

convenience for public transport mode changes (Newman & Kenworthy, 1989).

Mochit station has commercial activities in the form of street vendors with

no built environments to house them. This indicates the existing demand for

commercial activities and therefore the initiative can be implemented through

integrations of shops and stalls within the integrated transit hub, effectively

providing residents and commuters with day-to-day amenities.

Recreational Space

Public Amenity

Covered Walkway

Always Footpath

Limited Parking

Minimal Roads for Development

This pre-assessment process, as part of the transfer exercise, studies appropriate

applications of input initiatives identified in Section 4.1.2 to formulate possible

‘output initiatives’ that would follow the same intentions as the source city. This

process is fully illustrated in the coming up table (FIGURE 29).

The exercise has formulated possible output initiatives for Mochit and

demonstrated possible obstacles and assistances in transforming input to output

initiatives while maintaining the same intentions. The goal of these intentions

is to decrease automobile dependency through ensuring attractiveness of public

transports over private automobiles. These possible ‘output initiatives’ will be

explored fully through the implementation process in the next section.

33

STRATEGIES INITIATIVES INTENTIONS PRE-ASSESSMENT MAJOR IMPLEMENTATION

INTEGRATED TRANSIT

• Create better connection

between public transport

modes to encourage the use

of public transport.

• Mochit is already an informal inter-modal interchange area

between the BTS, MRT and the buses and vans that is used by

a large number of commuters on a daily basis. Therefore, any

connection between different modes would enhance the use

of public transportation.

• The under-used depot has the potential to be intensified due

to its adjacency to transport stations.

• There is no effective unified plan between the land use and

transport infrastructure (Gibson, 2011) which results in the

lack of proper integrated transport hub, and insufficient

space to create one.

• The current conditions of the site are;

• BTS – Elevated station with stairs and escalators to

serve the street level (APPENDIX E; IMAGE R)

• MRT – Underground with entrance on the street level

• Bus – Stops along the street adjacent to entrances to

the BTS and the MRT (IMAGE 21)

• Van – Informal terminals along the street (IMAGE 18)

• Motorbike taxis – Informal terminals at the BTS and MRT

entrances for further connection into small streets

• Shops – Scattered along the footpath (IMAGE 20)

• There is also a lack of coordination between different

agencies in connecting different transport modes. The

problems include disagreements on investments and profits.

Modify the underused space adjacent to the station, which is currently serving as on-ground parking, into an integrated hub

which connects the BTS to the MRT through commercial spaces and create a regulated bus

and van terminal similar to those in Bishan.

DAY

-TO

-DAY

CO

NVE

NIE

NCE

ON

E ST

OP

HU

B

PLU

SM

INU

S

FIGURE 29 : Ex-ante assessment detail (1/4)

34

RECREATIONAL SPACE

STRATEGIES INITIATIVES INTENTIONS PRE-ASSESSMENT MAJOR IMPLEMENTATION

• The two large parks within the site are operated and

maintained by the SRT, which is a government agency.

• ‘Going to the park’ is not a common culture in Bangkok due

to the lack of green spaces and climates. The main road is the

barrier for residents to reach these parks. The green space is

also fenced up with few entrances and in effect, isolating it

from the footpaths.

Improve the accessibility to the existing park.

PLU

SM

INU

S

• While Singapore recognises public amenities as a very

important function, Bangkok has not mentioned about it in

their plans yet (URA, 2014; DPT, 2006). The existing form of

public amenities are usually provided by private agencies or

constructed by politicians without further maintenance plans

in place.

• The concept of public amenities is not very common in

Bangkok and there is low visible demand that would guarantee

the success of such programs. However, there are some sport

facilities in the park but they are not easily accessed by the

residents.

Incorporate public facilities with the transit hub which will allow residents to easier

access.MIN

US

PUBLIC AMENITY

MO

RE C

IVIC

SPA

CE

FIGURE 29 : Ex-ante assessment detail (2/4)

• There are commercial activities on the site but in the forms

of street vendors, especially along the pedestrian influx

corridors. Most of the vendors are food, accessories and

clothing stores utilising push trolley or mat typology (IMAGE

20). This shows the demand for appropriate commercial

spaces.

• There is no existing ‘built up’ space dedicated to these

commercial activities. Chatujak Market is one of the big

commercial spaces in Mochit, but it only operates on the

weekends.

Integrate shops and stalls facing the street within the transit hub.

PLU

SM

INU

S

• Decentralise development.

• Provided day-to-day

convenience.

• Minimise the requirement to

commute.

COMMERCIALISATION

ON GROUND FLOORW

ALK

ABL

E LI

VIN

G E

NVI

RON

MEN

T

DAY

-TO

-DAY

CO

NVE

NIE

NCE

35

STRATEGIES INITIATIVES INTENTIONS PRE-ASSESSMENT MAJOR IMPLEMENTATION

ALWAYS FOOTPATH

• Bangkok’s dense mixed-use urban fabric condition is suitable

for walking (Boonlua, 2008).

• There are large pedestrian influxes between different

transport modes and key destinations such as the Chatujak

Weekend Market.

• However, the existing footpaths are not sufficient. They

are narrowed, neglected and blocked by street furniture

locations and vendors.

• Moreover, not all streets have footpath, especially that of

privately owned ‘soi’.

Improve the quality of existing footpath and introduce more footpath in major sois with

the residential areas.

PLU

SM

INU

S

WA

LKA

BLE

LIVI

NG

EN

VIRO

NM

ENT

• Enhance walking

experience, make walking a

better choice especially for

tropical weather.

COVERED WALKWAY

• Bangkok and Singapore has similar tropical climates of high

temperature, humidity and rainfall which partly prevent

citizens from walking to and from public transport stations.

The covered walkway will be beneficial to encourage walking

in such climates.

• The office complex could benefit from the covered walkway

by creating better connections between buildings to assist

and improve walkability.

• The elevated ground floor of the HDB makes Bishan

permeable. Yet, Mochit does not allow for the same physical

conditions as the covered walkway needs to be an external

part of the buildings.

Create covered walkways network connecting key destinations on the site as well as

connecting buildings within the same complex.

PLU

SM

INU

S

FIGURE 29 : Ex-ante assessment detail (3/4)

36

• As the accessibility via public transports are relatively low,

major modes of transportation becomes private vehicles

due to its convenience. Therefore, most of Bangkok’s

developments prioritise private vehicles access.

• In Bishan, the initiative is implemented in HDB developments

which are owned and operated by the government, but

Mochit consists mostly of private lands which the government

has limited authority in dealing with and controlling, apart

from the government office complex.

Minimise private vehicular access in government office complex areas and improve

walking facilities.MIN

USMINIMAL ROADS FOR

DEVELOPMENT

STRATEGIES INITIATIVES INTENTIONS PRE-ASSESSMENT MAJOR IMPLEMENTATION

• Bishan’s HBD areas provide limited charged parking for

residents but on-street parking in private residential areas

is allowed. Singapore also controls parking spaces only in

government developments, which Mochit does not have many

of.

Provide limited and centralised parking in the government office complex areas, remove on-ground parking in front of buildings and

improve walking facilities.

MIN

USCA

R RE

DU

CED

RES

IDEN

TIA

L A

REA

• Reduce convenience of

private automobile.

• Reduce space used for

automobile infrastructure,

create more land for other

purposes.

LIMITED PARKING

• Provide convenience for

commuters to change

modes.

• Efficient boarding time.

• Accurate fare charged.

INTEGRATED TICKET

SYSTEM

WO

RKIN

G A

S O

NE

• Even though Singapore’s public transports belong to different

companies, both private and public, the ticket system is

coordinated. In contrast, each of the transport modes in

Bangkok has its own payment system;

• BTS : Single, daily or monthly ticket.

• MRT : Single or daily token, monthly ticket.

• Bus : cash on board or yearly ticket with in the same bus

company.

• Van : cash to driver or queue manager.

Introduce integrated ticket systems for all public transport modes. M

INU

S

FIGURE 29 : Ex-ante assessment detail (4/4)

06 IMPLEMENTATION

IMPLEMENTATION6.0

38

Covered Walkway

Minimal Roads for Development

Limited Parking

Always Footpath

Integrated Transit

Integrated Ticket System

Recreational Space

FIGURE 30 : Mochit implementation of Singapore strategy

Public Amenity

Commercialisation on Ground Floor

In this section, the ‘output’ initiatives’ derived from Bishan, Singapore will be

implemented on the site in Mochit, Bangkok, to fully explore the transferability.

However, it is important to keep in mind that this process would not reveal the

actual outcome of the implementation but to explore the output initiatives.

‘Since changes in Bangkok metropolis are so rapid and dramatic, the integrated planning of land use and transport including environment is much more important

and effective than in developed countries’ (Udomsri & Miyamoto, 1995; cited from Miyamoto, 1992)

250 M

100 M

39

FIGURE 31 : Bishan integrated hub concept Commercial area

Bus/Van route

Integrated Transit

Current underused depot and parking lot adjacent to BTS station are proposed

to be developed into an integrated transit hub, creating convenient connections

between BTS, MRT, buses and vans. There are over 40 bus lines running through

Mochit BTS station (Transit Bangkok, 2012), therefore the introduction of

a bus interchange would help ease the traffic caused by the queuing of buses

that is currently taking 1-2 out of 4 traffic lanes. For the very same reason, the

incorporation of vans into the transit terminal would improve the traffic flow.

Commercial spaces within the same development provide commuters with

amenities, facilities and entertainment as well as create vibrant connection to

residential area. The proposed implementation is shown in FIGURE 31, FIGURE 32

and FIGURE 34.

Commercialisation on Ground Floor

The current characteristic of street-facing shops in Mochit will be maintained

and utilized as to provide day-to-day for commuters and residents.

MRT Entrance in between shops under covered walkway

Commercial space facing street

Commercial space

Sheltered boarding area

Indoor waiting area

Sheltered boarding area

Through access to residential area

Indoor waiting area

Shops facing street

50 M

40

Integrated Ticket System

Recreational Space

Public Amenity

OFFICESOFFICES

RESIDENTIAL

SHOP HOUSESSHOP

HOUSES R RRR RR RR RR RRR

MRT

BTS

BUS INTERCHANGE

PARKING

DEPOTSHOPS

SHOPS

AMENITYSHOPS FOOD COURT

RESIDENTIAL

RESIDENTIAL

RESIDENTIAL

RR R RRRRR

RESIDENTIAL

RESIDENTIAL

MRT

BUS INTERCHANGEBUSBUS

FOOD COURT

PARKING

SUPERMARKET

SHOPS COMMUNITY CENTRE

CINEMA FOOD HALL

OFFICE

RESIDENTIAL

FIGURE 18 : Bishan integrated hub conceptual section

FIGURE 32 : Mochit integrated hub conceptual section

As the demand for public Amenity is not currently assessable, a public library

is introduced within the hub as a pilot project that would address and observe

public feedback, before introducing further expansion (FIGURE 32). It would be an

introduction to the new kind of public spaces.

One ticket should allow commuter to use on all mass public transport – BTS, MRT

and bus.

This initiative takes advantage of the existing park, creating permeable access

from integrated hub by removing the fence along the station for commuter and

residents to easily access this green space (FIGURE 34).

41

Sepa

rati

on f

rom

gre

en s

pace

w

ith

fenc

eCo

nnec

tion

wit

h gr

een

spac

e w

ith

wid

er f

ootp

ath

Dir

ect

conn

ecti

on t

o co

mm

erci

al a

rea

Wid

er f

ootp

ath

Indo

or w

aiti

ng a

rea

Shel

tere

d bo

ardi

ng a

rea

Bus

inte

rcha

nge

Smal

l foo

tpat

h

No

dedi

cate

bus

lane

Bus

lane

Ded

icat

ed s

hop

spac

es

Shop

s &

Str

eet

furn

itur

es

bloc

k fo

otpa

th

On-

grou

nd p

arki

ng

Roof

top

par

king

Shop

s an

d co

mm

erci

al a

rea

Dep

ot

Exis

ting

Dep

ot

Gro

und

floor

con

nect

ion

to

resi

dent

ial a

rea

Gro

und

floor

con

nect

ion

to

resi

dent

ial a

rea

No

conn

ecti

on t

o re

side

ntia

l are

a

FIGURE 33 : Mochit station - before implementation

FIGURE 34 : Mochit station - after implementation

10 M

5 M

10 M

5 M

42

FIGURE 35 : Mochit footpath and covered walkway

Existing footpath

Bus stops

Sois with street sholders

Proposed new footpath

Proposed covered walkway

Covered Walkway

Always Footpath

Covered walkway is proposed to extend from the hub to key destinations in

the area such as government office and weekend market in order to enhance

convenience of public transport accessibility (FIGURE 35). The network of covered

walkway is also proposed to connect buildings in government office complex to

encourage walking (FIGURE 36).

Existing footpath will be improved to become more pedestrian friendly by

regulating vendors and introducing maintenance plan. Major sois are proposed to

have at least one side footpath. Shared streets maybe acceptable for branch sois

(FIGURE 35).

250 M

100 M

“While there are many examples of well-planned cities in the temperatre regions, there is no well-developed

city in the tropics ...” Mrs. Dhanabaland in (Tan, 1999)

43

FIGURE 36 : Government office complex proposed implementation

Proposed green leisure space

Proposed parking building

Proposed covered walkway

Government office complex

Proposed street for private vehicles

Private automobile access to the government office is proposed to be restricted

to some area while pedestrian friendly environment is created to encourage

walking without automobile (FIGURE 36). On-ground parking in front of buildings

is proposed to be removed and replaced with centralized parking infrastructure.

Parking charge for both employees and visitors should ensure that travelling via

public transport is an obvious choice.

This section has illustrated the application of output initiatives, which intend to

pursue automobile independency, in the target site. The implementation and the

accomplishment of intended purpose will be discussed in the next section.

Limited Parking

Minimal Roads for Development

50 M

07 REFLECTION & FINDINGS

REFLECTION AND CONCLUSION7.0

45

7.1 IMPLEMENTATION REFLECTION

This section will reflect on the transfer exercises in sections 5.0 and 6.0 which

have provided this research with possible obstacles and advantages in transforming

input initiatives into output initiatives and to implementations of identified output

initiatives. The reflection will further explore possible obstacles and appropriate

amendments to achieve the initial purpose. These will help draw the conclusion to

the transferability of Singapore’s strategy. The detailed reflection can be found in

FIGURE 37.

Integrated Transit

Integrated Ticket System

Commercialisation on Ground Floor

The initiatives may not be able to increase the permeability of the site due

to the presences of dense private developments. However, Bangkok’s mixed-

use urban fabric condition is already suitable for walking (Boonlua, 2008). Thus,

provisions of quality footpath and covered walkway typologies would increase

walking convenience. This is because covered walkways are indeed appropriate to

Bangkok’s tropical climate.

The introduction of these initiatives in the government office complex may

still raise employees’ resistance (Marsden & Stead, 2011). The restriction of

automobile convenience alone will not reduce the requirement of traveling, and

hence public transports need to be an attractive option that commuters could turn

to (LTA, 2013a; Newman & Kenworthy, 1996). Therefore, the intentions need to

be simultaneously supported by other strategies that would improve accessibility

of public transports. Bangkok and the Vicinities Regional Plan 2056 suggested that

the improvement of public transport is imminent but the accessibility to it is still

unclear (Infrastructural Strategy Division, 2006).

Moreover, one of Singapore’s motivations for minimal roads and limited parking

is its limited land (Barter, 2008). Bangkok, on the contrary, does not have the same

pressing problem at hand. Thus, higher value functions like commercial areas and

severe traffic problems could be alternative motivations for the initiatives instead.

A pilot project is suitable for this initiative, as it could always turn back to

commercial spaces as it once was before if necessary and if the public response

is negative. The automobile dependency may not be significantly reduced as

the existing trip generated to reach public facilities is low. As mentioned, this is

because the notion of having a public facility is not a common concept in Bangkok.

Nevertheless, the success of the project could provide a sense of community to the

neighbourhood (Tan, 1999).

Creating better accessibility to parks may not have much contribution to

automobile independency as there is only 0.7m2 of green space per person (Vanno,

2012 cited from Phongspul, 2011). Thusly traveling is still a requirement.

Yet, ‘going to the park’ is not a common culture in Thailand due to the hot

and humid climate in the country. Green spaces are not considered current trip

generators. Nevertheless, improved accessibility for the parks would increase the

quality of life for residents in the Mochit area. The ticket system will create a smooth transition between different modes,

and henceforth increase attractiveness of public transports. Coordination between

different modes, especially for privately owned vehicles such as vans that normally

accepts cash payments, could be one of many issues. This would either create

exclusions for such modes or depreciate the whole integrated system.

The under-used space would be utilised to support public transit, instead of

current parking spaces that Boonlua had suggested to avoid (2008). The hub makes

public transports more convenient and accessible. Hence, it has become more

attractive and lead commuters to move away from private auto vehicles. However,

there may be financial and collaborative difficulties if the initiative is executed by

the public sector (Nims, 1963; Pianuan, et al.,1994). Therefore, the integrated hub

could be privately funded and operated with lease lands from the SRT.

Creating space for commercial activities on ground floor is, in fact, reorganizing

and relocating the existing commercial resources on the site. This serves present

shopping culture and day-to-day convenience for commuters. It would not only

reduce travel requirement but also increase attractiveness of public transport.

‘high density nodes of activity within the medium density suburbs, again making

public transport and walking more viable.’ (Newman & Kenworthy, 1989)

Recreational Space

Public Amenity

Covered Walkway

Always Footpath

Limited Parking

Minimal Roads for Development

The reflection has shown that output initiatives may not all be valid for pursuing,

especially in the case of aiming at the same intentions as the source city. Some

intentions could be achieved with certain alterations of the output initiatives,

while some others may need other systems for support.

Both initiatives enhance the accessibility to public transports and make such

modes more attractive. However, the limited and private lands could become

complications to the execution of both initiatives. Moreover, Thais’ attitude of

how walking is for the poor and of how car ownership defines financial status will

be one of the main obstacles which is difficult to alter (Gibson, 2011).

46

OFFICESOFFICES

RESIDENTIAL

SHOP HOUSESSHOP

HOUSES R RRR RR RR RR RRR

MRT

BTS

BUS INTERCHANGE

PARKING

DEPOT

SHOPS

AMENITYSHOPS FOOD COURTRESIDENTIAL

OFFICESOFFICES

RESIDENTIAL

SHOP HOUSESSHOP

HOUSES R RRR RR RR RR RRR

MRT

BTS

BUS INTERCHANGE

PARKING

DEPOT

SHOPS

AMENITYSHOPS FOOD COURTRESIDENTIAL

INITIATIVES INTENTIONS IMPLEMENTATION REFLECTIONS CONCLUSION

INTEGRATED TRANSIT

• Create better connection

between public transport

modes to encourage the use

of public transport.

• Bangkok’s development plan suggests that there will be more

interchange stations similar to that of Mochit’s in the future

(FIGURE 11). Therefore, the strategy would help improve

the accessibility and respective convenience to the transit

stations.

• The under-used spaces will be more practical as commercial

areas and transit hub areas rather than that of parking spaces

(Braun, 2011).

• The implementation would help provide day-to-day

convenience for the commuters. The business plan could

be similar to that of the integrated hubs, through private

funding on leasing land.

• To assist in the lack of incentives from the government

(Boonlua, 2008) and collaborative problems (Pianuan, et al.,

1994; Kenworthy, 1995; Nims, 1963), private agents could

drive this project themselves. The redevelopment could be

funded by private investors with incentives of returns from

the commercial spaces. The lands and buildings can be leased

from the STA and the BTSC.

• The government should assist in the control of rental prices

in order for existing vendors to be able to afford the rents.

There could be spaces that are dedicated to them without the

typology of built forms. This may help reduce investments.

Automobile independency is encouraged here through making public transports more attractive to users, by increasing the convenience of commuting through public transports. The development breaks the barriers between public transport and residents with better access. The land would also be used more wisely as Braun had suggested (2011). The integrated stations of Siam Square and Asoke with adjacent commercial developments suggest that this initiative could be successful. However, the lack of cooperation between different agencies to create connections with shared interests could prevent the success of this initiative. Singapore use this initiative as part of the holistic plan. In neighbourhood level, the hub increases convenience of public transportation and enhances commuting experience. In larger level, the hub are located at the strategic location to ensure the decentralise development indicated in concept plan (Wong & Goldblum, 2008; URA, 2014d).

The informal commercial spaces and shopping areas on the streets are common cultures in Bangkok. The initiative reorganises and regulates the existing resources on the site by providing appropriate spaces for existing commercial activities. This would reduce travel requirements and increase attractiveness of the transit hubs.

PLU

SPL

US

MIN

US

MIN

US

• Decentralise development.

• Provided day-to-day

convenience.

• Minimise the requirement

to commute.

COMMERCIALISATION

ON GROUND FLOOR

FIGURE 37 : Reflection of implementation (1/5)

47

INITIATIVES INTENTIONS IMPLEMENTATION REFLECTIONS CONCLUSION

OFFICESOFFICES

RESIDENTIAL

SHOP HOUSESSHOP

HOUSES R RRR RR RR RR RRR

MRT

BTS

BUS INTERCHANGE

PARKING

DEPOT

SHOPS

AMENITYSHOPS FOOD COURTRESIDENTIAL

• The initiative introduces new functions that are of easy

accessibility and reach for the residents. Less interaction

spaces such as public libraries is proposed as an initial

project.

• Since the concept of public amenities is quite innovative to

Bangkok, the project can be introduced within the transit

hub as a pilot project to prevent investment losses. This

allows residents’ feedbacks to be monitored. The space can

be modified back to commercial spaces later if there are no

positive responses.

This concept may be difficult to introduce in Bangkok and the public responses could be unpredictable. The public may not understand or feel responsible for the space (Pujinda, 2014). Unlike in the case of Singapore, where public amenities are essential for the residents’ quality of life and are highly used, Bangkok does not reciprocate such responses. Bangkok does not have those existing usages that would require commuting. Therefore, the initiative may not help reduce any travel requirements or pursue automobile independency. Nevertheless, the attempt could still provide a sense of community for the residents (Tan, 1999).

PLU

SM

INU

S

PUBLIC AMENITY

• Singapore’s fenceless parks may not be the best solution for

Bangkok. The capital of Thailand has homeless individuals

who do not get any support from the government and may

also use the parks inappropriately during night time.

• Introductions to more access points could be an effective

alternative. Entrances to the parks shall be coordinated with

the crossing points from the residential area and the flow of

the people.

Better access to green spaces will help increase the quality of life for the residents around the Mochit area. Yet, green space ratio for Bangkok is only at 0.7 m2 (Vanno, 2012 cited from Phongspul, 2011). Therefore, the creation of accesses to green spaces would not help decrease the travelling requirements to the parks. Nevertheless, ‘going to the park’ is not a very common culture in Bangkok. Hence, parks are not major trip generators at the present time. Therefore, the initiative may have low contributions to automobile independency regardless of improved accessibility.

MIN

US

• Decentralise development.

• Provided day-to-day

convenience.

• Minimise the requirement

to commute.

RECREATIONAL SPACEOFFICESOFFICES

RESIDENTIAL

SHOP HOUSESSHOP

HOUSES R RRR RR RR RR RRR

MRT

BTS

BUS INTERCHANGE

PARKING

DEPOT

SHOPS

AMENITYSHOPS FOOD COURTRESIDENTIAL

FIGURE 37 : Reflection of implementation (2/5)

48

COVERED WALKWAY

• Enhance walking

experience, make walking a

better choice especially for

tropical weather.

• The unplanned urban fabric condition of Bangkok creates

a mixed-use quality which makes it suitable for walking

(Boonlua, 2008). The infrastructure would increase walking

convenience and also improve foot access to public transports.

• Implementing this within the government complex would

increase walkability which also supports the minimising of

roads for developments.

• However, because of the limited area of the footpath in

residential areas, inserting covered walkways may negatively

affect the streetscapes. The location of the infrastructure

needs to be considered carefully by the importance of the

linkages and the sizes of the streets.

• One of the options is to attach walkways underneath the BTS

railway. This has been successfully done in the city centre;

Sky-walks around the Siam Square BTS station joins stations

together with department stores, hotels and office buildings.

• As Bangkok also does not have any elevated ground floor

structures like that of Singapore’s HDB, the permeability of

Singapore cannot be fully initiated.

The similar tropical climate allows Singapore to be a good role model for Bangkok to take after, as well as to other developing tropical cities in South East Asia. ‘While there are many examples of well-planned cities in the temperate regions, there is no well-developed city in the tropics ...’ said Mrs. Dhanabaland in (Tan, 1999). The initiative may not be applicable to all streets due to the different sizes and characteristics, and the level of permeability of the Bishan area may not be achieved. However, introducing covered walkways within the development and between key destinations could be a good introduction to the walking culture for Thai people. Another challenge for the success is that Thai people associate walking as being an act of the poor and they see the owning of cars as a status indicator. The convenience of walking alone may not be able to change these attitudes. It should be done together with car restriction measures and improvements of the public transportation networks, in effect, ‘creating public transport more attractive than automobile’ (Newman & Kenworthy, 1996). This has been the overall strategy of Singapore.

PLU

SM

INU

S

INITIATIVES INTENTIONS IMPLEMENTATION REFLECTIONS CONCLUSION

FIGURE 37 : Reflection of implementation (3/5)

49

• Reduce convenience of

private automobile.

• Reduce space used for

automobile infrastructure,

create more land for other

purposes.

• This initiative reduces the convenience of private vehicle

commuters, while other initiatives make public transports

and walking more attractive (URA, 2014).

• The government office is a good introduction to vehicle

restricted developments.

• However, as populist government policies and politics are

introduced, they may affect and upset the mainstream or not

benefit them at all. Such policies will not be proposed. ‘The

problem is that politicians who benefit from one project

are likely to obstruct the other projects’ (Suthiranart, 2001,

cited in Gibson, 2011). Therefore, public objections due to

car ownership attitudes could become a major obstacle to

the implementation of the initiative.

As the traffic in Bangkok is already severe (Gibson, 2011), the initiative will further reduce the comfort of motor vehicles. Nevertheless, marginalised private vehicle needs to work together with other measures (Macário & Marques, 2008). The initiative alone will not help reduce any car dependency especially with the current car ownership rate. Public transport networks also need to be amended to become more attractive than the private modes of transportation. The current plan implemented by Bangkok suggests that improvement is on its way. Moreover, as Singapore’s limited land motivates this initiative (Tan, 1999), Bangkok does not have the same issue. Higher value functions could be an alternative incentive.

PLU

SM

INU

S

MINIMAL ROADS FOR

DEVELOPMENT

ALWAYS FOOTPATH

• The footpath will help to improve walking experiences,

enhance existing fine grain and mixed-use urban fabric

conditions (Boonlua, 2008).

• The government should regulate illegal usages of footpaths

and set aside funds for maintenance to ensure that

pedestrians have access to well-maintained footpaths.

• The initiative is difficult to implement in the existing private

residential areas where there was no proper setback to

safeguard the land for footpaths. However, introducing new

setback regulations for future developments is still possible.

This will allow for the introduction of proper walking

infrastructure.

• There are certain streets which have shared spaces between

pedestrians and cars. These spaces, under certain conditions,

are suitable such as in the case of small dead-end sois with

mostly slow vehicles.

The footpath would help provide walking infrastructures to the already walkable urban fabric of the area in Bangkok. It will help to reduce motor vehicle requirements for short distance travels and increase the convenience to access transit stops by foot. Private lands with no safeguards for walking infrastructures are main obstacles to this initiative ‘Singapore’s planners have always understood the need to be judicious with space, to avoid making short sighted mistakes, such as prematurely developing and ‘using up’ land that should have been reserved for potentially better, future uses.’ (Bin, 2013). The attitude towards walking is still an issue that needs to be slowly altered. Moreover, some of the new residential developments in the out-skirt areas of Bangkok are heavily zoned and henceforth lack any mixed-use characteristics that will support and encourage walking.

PLU

SM

INU

S

• Enhance walking

experience, make walking a

better choice especially for

tropical weather.

INITIATIVES INTENTIONS IMPLEMENTATION REFLECTIONS CONCLUSION

FIGURE 37 : Reflection of implementation (4/5)

50

• Even though Thailand does not have any major land limitation

problems like that of Singapore, higher value for usages

of the properties could be incentives to move away from

parking lots.

• There will still be high demands for parking following high

car ownership rates. This is illustrated in landed house areas

where cars are parked on public streets because residents

have more cars than their private parking space (APPENDIX

E; IMAGE I).

• Building regulations in Bangkok also requires large numbers

of parking spaces especially for commercial buildings

(APPENDIX F and APPENDIX G - MOI, 2012; Barter, 2010). It is

very common for buildings to be equipped with multi-storey

parking spaces or large on-ground parking lots. The building

regulations should reduce parking space requirements or

limit parking spaces for building within walking distance from

public transports. Urban planning should discourage car parks

especially around public transport stations (Braun, 2011).

As mentioned earlier, the initiatives that restrict conveniences of motor vehicles would not work on its own without the aid and support of other initiatives (Macário & Marques, 2008). The action would not help reduce the current rates of car ownerships but it may help discourage private vehicle usages.

PLU

SM

INU

S

LIMITED PARKING

• Reduce convenience of

private automobile.

• Reduce space used for

automobile infrastructure,

create more land for other

purposes.

INITIATIVES INTENTIONS IMPLEMENTATION REFLECTIONS CONCLUSION

• The implementation will allow smooth transitions between

different transport modes for commuters.

• However, the system could get complicated when it comes to

vans, as this mode of transportation in Bangkok is relatively

informal. Each van is registered but is privately owned and

usually runs under managers who get commissions from each

van trip. Cash payment allows them to split the income

directly and instantly. Integrated ticket systems will affect

the existing solution to the vans’ fee system.

This reflects coordination issues between different agencies. Private owned vehicles would be one of the major difficulties that come into play when negotiating. Nevertheless, the implementation of the ticketing system, if possible, would increase the convenience of public transports. This is especially true in the case of those outside mass rail transit system coverage who needs to change transit modes. Yet again, this initiative would not be successful unless the public transport coverage is sufficient for commuters.

PLU

SM

INU

S

INTEGRATED TICKET

SYSTEM

• Provide convenience for

commuters to change

modes.

• Efficient boarding time.

• Accurate fare charged.(Source: Cichaz.com)

FIGURE 37 : Reflection of implementation (5/5)

51

7.2 CONCLUSIONS

The preceding chapters have explored different planning principles and

backgrounds of Singapore - the source city, and Bangkok - the target city. Together

with transfer exercise, they have found possible obstacles and advantages of

strategy transfers to Bangkok.

For Bangkok, and possibly many Asian cities, one of the pressing obstacles is

the private ownership of land. Singapore’s success comes from its ‘obsessively and

thoughtfully controlled urban environments’ (Bin, 2013, cited from Betsky, 2013),

which is partly made possible through government ownership of land. Bangkok

‘In countries that have weaker central control, more political corruption and little tradition of planning, Applying the Singapore model will involve attention not just to

the transport sector but to other parts of politics and economic management’(Han, 2010)

needs to instead rely on controlling and regulating of the urban environments to

support the development plans. This brings up the next obstacle that the Thai

government lacks the power to control land use. Initiatives generally are delayed

or cannot be realized. Apart from a vague land use plan, this is also due to a

populist government authority and their politics where the execution of projects

rely on possible benefits gained (Gibson, 2011). These confirm that sometimes the

transfer could not be completely successful without the transfer of relationship

between institutions that comprehends the strategies (Macário & Marques, 2008).

However, Bangkok has organically evolved to become a dense mixed-use city

which is a good foundation of mass transit system (Kenworthy, 1995) and walkability

(Boonlua, 2008). These are part of the focuses of Singapore’s planning, suggesting

positive outcomes from the initiatives implementation. Bangkok’s high public

transport usage also suggests demand for mass transit system. This research has

proposed how Bangkok can use Singapore’s strategies to manage and organize

interchange nodes and the surrounding vicinities in order to support automobile

independency. Given the proposed Bangkok and Vicinities Regional Plan 2056,

there will be many more interchange nodes which can benefit from this study.

The implementation has advised that successful strategies for automobile

independency in Singapore could be transferred to Bangkok with appropriate

adjustments. Some initiatives may not reduce automobile dependency in the same

way as they do in Singapore, and therefore suitable initiatives shall be selected

and adapted to ensemble, not only problems, but also institutional, physical and

financial conditions of the target city. The initiatives studied in this report are only

on the neighbourhood level, around the interchange hub. They work together with

larger level initiatives such as the distribution and location of the hubs around

Singapore to achieve the nations’ planning goals. Therefore, some target cities

may require strategies from different levels to achieve automobile independency.

Singapore’s strategy on the neighbourhood level essentially aims to increase

accessibility to public transports, reduce travel requirement and marginalise

private vehicles. Achieving these three goals would increase the attractiveness of

public transports altogether. Together with other measures, Singapore’s strategy

would help developing cities move from private vehicles to public transports. These

pursue automobile independency and hence contribute to sustainable transport

systems.

08 REFERENCE

REFERENCES8.0

53

• Anon., 2010. Chatujak Weekend Market. [Online] Available at: http://www.

chatuchak.org/ [Accessed 22 July 2014].

• Barter, P. A., 2008. Chapter 6 - Singapore’s Urban Transport: Sustainability

by Design or Necessity?. In: T. Wong, B. yuen & C. Goldblum, eds. Spatial

Planning for A Sustainable Singapore. New York: Springer, pp. 95-112.

• Barter, P. A., 2010. Parking Policy in Asian Cities, Singapore: Asian

Development Bank.

• Bin, T. S., 2013. Long-term Land Use Planning in Singapore, Singapore: School

of Public Policy.

• BMCL, 2005. Bangkok Metro Public Company Limited. [Online] Available

at: http://www.bangkokmetro.co.th/metrosys.aspx?Menu=30&Lang=Th

[Accessed 22 July 2014].

• Boonlua, T., 2008. STDZ : Sustainable Transit Development Zone. [Documents

for Town and Country Planning Conference]. เอกสารประกอบการประชุมวิชาการ

ดานการวางแผนภาคและเมือง, pp. 129-143. (In Thai)

• Braun, M., 2011. Bangkok Public Transport Accessibility Levels, Rotterdam:

Erasmus School of Economics.

• BTSC, 2011. Bangkok Mass Transit System Public Company. [Online] Available

at: http://www.bts.co.th/corporate/en/01-about-history.aspx [Accessed 22

July 2014].

• Chatujak District Office, 2013. [Getting to know Chatujak]. รู้จักกับเขตจตุจักร.

[Online] Available at: http://203.155.220.217/chatuchak/about/g1.htm

[Accessed 04 July 2014]. (In Thai)

• Chumsri, D., 2013. Worst is yet to come for Bangkok traffic. [Online] Available

at: http://english.cntv.cn/program/asiatoday/20130112/105793.shtml

[Accessed 19 August 2014].

• Department of City Planning , 2012b. Bangkok Plan. [Online] Available at:

http://www.bangkokplan.org/website/images/stories/06_plan_table_sum.

pdf [Accessed 26 August 2014].

• Department of City Planning, 2012a. Bangkok Plan. [Online] Available at:

http://www.bangkokplan.org/documents/English_mapIn.pdf [Accessed 26

August 2014].

• DPT, 2006. Executive Summary Report: Bangkok and Vicinities Regional Plan,

Bangkok: Consultants of Technology. (In Thai)

• European Commission, 2003. Achieving Sustainable Transport and Land

use with Integrated Policies, s.l.: Energy, Environment and Sustainable

Development.

• FIP Congresses and Conferences, 2014. Bangkok General Information.

[Online] Available at: http://www.fip.org/bangkok2014/Bangkok-Bangkok,-

Thailand/2057/Bangkok_General_Information/ [Accessed 27 June 2014].

• General Register Office, 2014. Official Statistic Registration System. [Online]

Available at: http://stat.bora.dopa.go.th/stat/y_stat56.html [Accessed 27

June 2014].

• Gibson, J. M., 2011. The Application of Transit Development Zones in Bangkok:

Thak Laksi Case Study, Cincinnati: s.n.

• Han, S. S., 2010. Managing motorization in sustainable transport planning: the

Singapore experience. Journal of Transport Geography, pp. 314-321.

• Hean, C. K., 2008. Achieving Sustainable Urban Development. [Online]

Available at: https://www.cscollege.gov.sg/Knowledge/Ethos/World%20

Cities%20Summit/Pages/04Achieving%20Sustainable%20Urban%20

Development.aspx [Accessed 03 August 2014].

• Hui, Y., 2014. Singapore Transport Planning - Research Project [Interview] (11

July 2014).

• IECONOMICS, 2014. ieconomics. [Online] Available at: http://ieconomics.com

[Accessed 02 August 2014].

• Infrastructural Strategy Division, 2006. [Bangkok and Vicinities Regional Plan

2056] ผังภาคกรุงเทพมหานครและปริมณฑล พ.ศ.2600. [Online] Available at:

http://office.bangkok.go.th/iepdd/article/bma2006.pdf [Accessed 28 May

2014]. (In Thai)

• Inkpen, A. C. & Pien, W., 2006. An Examination of Collaboration and

Knowledge Transfer: China-Singapore Suzhou Industrial Park. Journal of

Management Studies, June, 43(4), pp. 779-811.

• Kenworthy, J., 1995. Automobile dependence in Bangkok: an international

comparison with implications for planning policies. World Transport Policy

54

• NEA, N. E. A., 2014. Department of Statistics Singapore. [Online] Available at:

http://www.singstat.gov.sg/finding_A-Z.html#R [Accessed 09 August 2014].

• Newman, P. & Kenworthy, J., 1989. Cities and Automobile Dependence: A

Source book. Hants, United Kingdom: Gower Publishing Company Limited.

• Newman, P. & Kenworthy, J., 1999. Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming

Automobile Dependence. Washington, DC: Island Press.

• Newman, P. W. & Kenworthy, J. R., 1996. The land use- transport connection.

Land Use Policy, 13(1), pp. 1-22.

• Ng, M. K., 1999. Political Economy and Urban Planning. Progress in Planning,

51(1).

• Nims, C. R., 1963. City Planning in Thailand, Bangkok, Thailand: s.n.

• Ong, R., 2011. Ride of Drive?. [Online] Available at: http://blog.moneysmart.

sg/car-ownership/ride-or-drive-the-cost-of-car-ownership-vs-public-

transport-in-singapore/ [Accessed 02 August 2014].

• Pianuan, K., Kaosa-ard, M. S. & Pienchob, P., 1994. Bangkok Traffic Congestion:

Is there a Solutions?. TDRI Quarterly Review, June, 9(2), pp. 20-23.

• Public Transport Council, 2014. PTC APPROVES ABOUT HALF OF THE 6.6% FARE

CAP FOR 2013 FAIR INCREASE, ROLLS OVER REMINDER FOR 2014 EXERCISE.

[Online] Available at: http://www.publictransport.sg/content/dam/

publictransport/pdf/Fare%20revision%202014%20Press%20release%20v1-f.pdf

[Accessed 02 August 2014].

• Pujinda, P., 2014. Singapore urban planning - Research Project [Interview] (06

July 2014).

• Ruangsuwan, J., 2012. Association of Siamese Architects. [Online] Available at:

http://download.asa.or.th/03media/04law/cba/mr/mr55-64.pdf [Accessed

23 August 2014].

• Sakkayarojkol, O., 2013. An Overview of Spatial Policy in Asian and European

Countries: Thailand. [Online] [Accessed 16 June 2014].

• Singapore Department of Statistic, 2014. Department of Statistic Singapore:

Latest Data. [Online] Available at: http://www.singstat.gov.sg/statistics/

latest_data.html#14 [Accessed 29 June 2014].

• SLA, 2014. Management of State Land and Building. [Online] Available at:

http://www.sla.gov.sg/htm/ser/ser02.htm [Accessed 23 June 2014].

• Stone, D., 1999. Learning Lessons and Transferring Policy across Time, Space

and Disciplines. Politics, 19(1), pp. 51-59.

• Street Directory, 2014. Bishan District Guide. [Online] Available at:

http://www.streetdirectory.com/asia_travel/travel/travel_main.

php?zonename=Bishan [Accessed 06 July 2014].

• Tanaboriboon, Y., 1993. Bangkok Traffic. IATSS Research, 17(1).

• Tan, S., 1999. Home. Work. Play.. Singapore: Urban Redevelopment Authority.

• Tay, H., 2014. Singapore Transport Planning - Research Project [Interview] (05

June 2014).

• The Centre of Sustainable Transport, 2005. Defining Sustainable

Transportation, s.l.: s.n.

• Transit Bangkok, 2012. Transit Bangkok. [Online] Available at: http://www.

transitbangkok.com/stations/Bangkok%20Bus/Mo%20Chit [Accessed 26 July

2014].

• Udomsri, R. & Miyamoto, K., 1995. An approach to prescribe for urban

problems in Bangkok by integrating transport, land use and environmental

policies. Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transport Studies, 1(2), pp.

745-758.

• URA, 2004. Bishan Heritage Trail. [Online] Available at: http://sunrise.ura.gov.

sg/uol/publications/lifestyle-reads/walking-maps-trails/north/Bishan.aspx

[Accessed 29 June 2014].

• URA, 2012. Skyline: Designing Our City - Planning for a Sustainable Singapore.

[Online] Available at: http://www.ura.gov.sg/skyline/skyline12/skyline12-03/

special/URA_Designing%20our%20City%20Supplement_July12.pdf [Accessed 16

May 2014].

• URA, 2013. Brochure Bisan-Tao Payoh. [Online] Available at: http://www.ura.

gov.sg/MS/DMP2013/regional-highlights/~/media/dmp2013/Planning%20

Area%20Brochures/Brochure_Bishan-TaoPayoh.ashx [Accessed 24 May 2014].

• URA, 2014a. Urban Redevelopment Authority. [Online] Available at: http://

www.ura.gov.sg/uol/ [Accessed 1 July 2014].

• URA, 2014b. Island Wide - URA Master Plan 2014.

[Online] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/

and Practice, 1(3), pp. 31-41.

• Limpaiboon, A., 2010. Innovative Landscape Urban Planning for Bangkok

Sustainable Transportation development, Three study models of Bangkok.

Bangkok, KMUTT.

• LTA, 2013a. Land Transport Master Plan 2013. [Online] Available at: http://

www.lta.gov.sg/content/dam/ltaweb/corp/PublicationsResearch/files/

ReportNewsletter/LTMP2013Report.pdf [Accessed 4 April 2014].

• LTA, 2013b. HOUSEHOLD INTERVIEW TRAVEL SURVEY 2012: PUBLIC TRANSPORT

MODE SHARE RISES TO 63%. [Online] Available at: http://app.lta.gov.sg/apps/

news/page.aspx?c=2&id=1b6b1e1e-f727-43bb-8688-f589056ad1c4 [Accessed

20 June 2014].

• LTA, 2013c. Singapore Land Transport Statistics in Brief 2013. [Online]

Available at: http://www.lta.gov.sg/content/dam/ltaweb/corp/

PublicationsResearch/files/FactsandFigures/Stats_in_Brief_2013.pdf

[Accessed 16 January 2014].

• Macário, R. & Marques, C. F., 2008. Transferability of Sustainable Urban

Mobility Measures. Research in Transportation Economics, Volume 22, pp.

146-156.

• Manager ASTV, 2012. [‘First car’, strategy to solve or create the problem?].

“รถคันแรก” นโยบายแก้ปัญหาเพื่อสร้างปัญหา ??. [Online] Available at: http://

www.manager.co.th/Daily/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9550000094701 [Accessed

4 May 2014]. (In Thai)

• Marsden, G. & Stead, D., 2011. Policy transfer and learning in the field of

transport: A review of concepts and evidence. Transport Policy, Volume 18,

pp. 492-500.

• MOI, M. o. I., 2012. Association of Siamese Architecture. [Online] Available at:

http://download.asa.or.th/03media/04law/cba/mr17-07.pdf [Accessed 26

August 2014].

• National Statistical Office, 2013. National Statistical Office, Ministry of

Information and Communication Technology. [Online] Available at: http://

web.nso.go.th/en/pub/e_book/YEARBOOK_2013/index.html#/3/zoomed

[Accessed 02 August 2014].

08 REFERENCE

APPENDICES9.0

56

APPENDIX A :

Singapore Land Use Map (URA, 2014d)

57

APPENDIX B :

Bangkok Land Use Map (Department of City Planning, 2012a)

58

สรุปขอกําหนดการใชประโยชนที่ดินตามกฎกระทรวงใหใชบงัคับผังเมืองรวมกรงุเทพมหานคร พ.ศ. ....

การใชประโยชนที่ดินประเภท ย.1 ย.2 ย.3 ย.4 ย.5 ย.6 ย.7 ย.8 ย.9 ย.10 พ.1 พ.2 พ.3 พ.4 พ.5 อ.1 อ.2 อ.3 ก.1 ก.2 ก.3 ก.4 ก.5 ศ.1 ศ.2ท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทบานเดี่ยว ท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทบานแฝด x x x x x ท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทบานแถว x 1 x x x x ท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทหองแถว ตึกแถว x 2 x x x x ท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทอาคารอยูอาศัยรวม พื้นท่ีไมเกิน 1,000 ตารางเมตร x 2 x x x x 4 ท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทอาคารอยูอาศัยรวม พื้นท่ีไมเกิน 2,000 ตารางเมตร x x 3 x x x x x x x xท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทอาคารอยูอาศัยรวม พื้นท่ีไมเกิน 5,000 ตารางเมตร x x 3 1* x x x x x x x x x xท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทอาคารอยูอาศัยรวม พื้นท่ีไมเกิน 10,000 ตารางเมตร x x 3 1* x 2 2 x x x x x x x x x xท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทอาคารอยูอาศัยรวม พื้นท่ีเกิน 10,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x 3 3 3 x 3 3 x x x x x x x x x xพาณิชยกรรมประเภทหองแถว ตึกแถว x 2 1 x x x x พาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 100 ตารางเมตร พาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 300 ตารางเมตร x 2 2 2 2 2 พาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 500 ตารางเมตร x 3 2 2 x x x x x 3 2 พาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 1,000 ตารางเมตร x x 3 3 x x x x x x 3 พาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 2,000 ตารางเมตร x x x 2 x x x x x x x x x 2พาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 5,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x 2 x x x x x x x x x xพาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 10,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x 3 3 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 x x x x x x x x x xพาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีเกิน 10,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x x x 3 3 2 2 x 3 3 2 2 x x x x x x x x x xสํานักงานประเภทหองแถว ตึกแถว x 2 1 x x x x สํานักงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 100 ตารางเมตร สํานักงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 300 ตารางเมตร x 2 x 2 x x 1 สํานักงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 500 ตารางเมตร x x 2 1 1 x x x x x x สํานักงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 1,000 ตารางเมตร x x x 2 1 x x x x x x x x สํานักงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 2,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x x 2 2 1 x x x x x x x x xสํานักงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 5,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x x 3 2 2 x x x x x x x x xสํานักงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 10,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x x x 2 3 2 2 2 x x x x x x x x x 2สํานักงานพื้นท่ีเกิน 10,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x x x x x 2 1 x 3 3 2 1 x x x x x x x x x xโรงแรมไมเกิน 50 หอง x 2 2 2 x x x x x x x x โรงแรมไมเกิน 80 หอง x 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 x x x x x x x x xโรงแรมเกิน 80 หอง x 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 x x x x x x x x x xตลาดพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 1,000 ตารางเมตร 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 x x x 1 1 1 1 1 1 1ตลาดพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 2,500 ตารางเมตร x x 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 x x x x x x 2 2 x xตลาดพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 5,000 ตารางเมตร x x 3 3 3 3 3 x x x 3 3 3 x x x x x x x x 3 3 x xตลาดพื้นท่ีเกิน 5,000 ตารางเมตร x x 3 3 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 3 3 x xคลังนํ้ามันเชื้อเพลิง/สถานท่ีเก็บนํ้ามันเช้ือเพลิงเพื่อจําหนาย x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 3 x x xสถานีบริการนํ้ามันเชื้อเพลิง 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 x xสถานท่ีบรรจุกาซ/สถานท่ีเก็บกาซ/หองบรรจุกาซ 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11สถานีบริการกาซปโตรเลียมเหลว x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 3 x x xสถานีบริการกาซธรรมชาต ิ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 x 1 1 1 1 1 1 x xศูนยประชุม/อาคารแสดงสินคา/นิทรรศการ x x 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 2 2 x x x x x x x x x xสถานบริการ x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xโรงมหรสพ x x x 3 3 3 3 3 x x x x x x x x 2 2สวนสนุก x x 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 x x x x x x 3 3 x xสนามแขงรถ x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xสนามแขงมา x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xสนามยิงปน x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xสวนสัตว x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 3 x x xสถานสงเคราะหหรือรับเลี้ยงสัตว x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xโรงงานประเภทหองแถว ตึกแถว x x 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 x x 9 9 9 x x x x 9 x xโรงงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 100 ตารางเมตร x 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 x 9 9 9 x xโรงงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 300 ตารางเมตร x x 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 x x x 5 5 x xโรงงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 500 ตารางเมตร x x x x 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 x x x 5 5 x xโรงงานพื้นท่ีเกิน 500 ตารางเมตร x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 9 9 x x x x x x x xหนวยงานคอนกรีตผสมเสร็จ (ช่ัวคราว) x x 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 x x 10 10 x xโรงฆาสัตว/โรงพักสัตว x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xไซโลเก็บผลิตผลทางการเกษตร x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xการเลี้ยงสัตวเพื่อการคา x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xการเพาะเลี้ยงสัตวนํ้าเค็ม/นํ้ากรอย x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 4 x x xสถานีขนสงผูโดยสาร 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 x x x x 2 x x 2 x xสถานท่ีเก็บ/สถานีรับสง/กิจการรับสงสินคา x x x x 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 x x x 3 3 x xการซ้ือขาย/เก็บช้ินสวนเคร่ืองจักรกลเกา x x x 2 2 2 2 x x x 2 2 x x x x x x x x xการซ้ือขาย/เก็บเศษวัสดุพื้นท่ีเกิน 100 ตารางเมตร (เปนอาคารปด) x 2 2 2 2 2 2 x x x x x x x x x 2 x 2 2 2 x xการกําจัดสิ่งปฏิกูลและมูลฝอย x 6 6 6 x x x x x x x x x x x 6 6 6 x x x 6 6 x xการกําจัดวัตถุอันตราย x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 5 5 5 5 x x 5 x x xสุสาน/ฌาปนสถาน 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 7 7สถานศึกษาระดับต่ํากวาอุดม/อาชีวศึกษา x x 8 8 8 สถานศึกษาระดับอุดม/อาชีวศึกษา x x x x 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 x x x x x x x x 2 2สถานพยาบาล 5 5 8 8 สถานสงเคราะหหรือรับเลี้ยงเด็ก x x x สถานสงเคราะหหรือรับเลี้ยงคนชรา x x x สถานสงเคราะหหรือรับเลี้ยงคนพิการ x x x ปายโฆษณา 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 x 4 4 4 x xท่ีพักอาศัยช่ัวคราวสําหรับคนงาน 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

อัตราสวนพ้ืนท่ีอาคารรวมตอพื้นท่ีดิน – FAR (ก) (ตอ 1) 1 1.5 2.5 3 4 4.5 5 6 7 8 5 6 7 8 10 2 1.5 1 0.5 1 0.5 1 1 3 4

อัตราสวนพ้ืนท่ีวางตอพื้นท่ีอาคารรวม – OSR(ข) (รอยละ) 40 20 12.5 10 7.5 6.5 6 5 4.5 4 6 5 4.5 4 3 15 20 40 100 40 100 40 40 10 7.5

ท่ีวางดานหนาอาคาร (เมตร) (ค) 2 2 (ง)

2 2 2 2 2

ท่ีวางดานขางอาคาร (เมตร) (ค) 2 1 1 2 1 1 1

ท่ีวางดานหลังอาคาร (เมตร) (ค) 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

ขนาดแปลงท่ีดินต่ําสดุในโครงการจัดสรรฯ (ตารางวา) 100 50 (จ)

1,000 100 1,000 100

ความสูงสูงสดุ (เมตร) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12

เงื่อนไข X = ไมอนุญาต

1* = เงื่อนไขต้ังอยูริมถนนที่มีเขตทางไมนอยกวา 10 ม./หรืออยูในระยะ 500 ม. จากสถานีรถไฟฟาขนสงมวลชน 4 = เงื่อนไขเรื่องที่ต้ัง 8 = เงื่อนไขเรื่องขนาด/ระดับการบริการ 1 = เงื่อนไขต้ังอยูริมถนนที่มีเขตทางไมนอยกวา 12 ม./หรืออยูในระยะ 500 ม. จากสถานีรถไฟฟาขนสงมวลชน 5 = เงื่อนไขความเกีย่วเนื่องของกิจกรรม 9 = เงื่อนไขตามบัญชีทายกฎกระทรวงฯ 2 = เงื่อนไขต้ังอยูริมถนนที่มีเขตทางไมนอยกวา 16 ม./หรืออยูในระยะ 500 ม. จากสถานีรถไฟฟาขนสงมวลชน 6 = เงื่อนไขภายใตการควบคุม/อนุญาต กทม. 10 = เงื่อนไขต้ังช่ัวคราวในหนวยสถานทีก่อสรางหรือบริเวณใกลเคียง 3 = เงื่อนไขต้ังอยูริมถนนที่มีเขตทางไมนอยกวา 30 ม./หรืออยูในระยะ 500 ม. จากสถานีรถไฟฟาขนสงมวลชน 7 = เงื่อนไขทดแทนของเดิม 11 = เงื่อนไขเวนกิจการบางประเภทที่ระบุไวในกฎกระทรวงฯ (ก) FAR (Floor Area Ratio) “อัตราสวนพื้นที่อาคารรวมตอพืน้ที่ดิน” หมายความวา อัตราสวนพืน้ที่อาคารรวมทกุช้ันของอาคารทุกหลังตอพืน้ทีดิ่นที่ใชเปนที่ต้ังอาคาร (ไมใชบังคับกับบานเดี่ยวและบานแฝด) (ข) OSR (Open Space Ratio) “อัตราสวนของที่วางตอพื้นที่อาคารรวม” หมายความวา อัตราสวนของทีว่างอันปราศจากส่ิงปกคลุมตอพื้นที่อาคารรวมทุกช้ันของอาคารทุกหลังที่กอสรางในที่ดินแปลงเดียวกัน (ไมใชบังคับกับบานเด่ียวและบานแฝด) (ค) ระยะรนรอบอาคาร ไมใชบังคับกับบานเดี่ยวทีม่ีขนาดแปลงที่ดินนอยกวาแปลงละ 40 ตร.ว.หรือมีดานใดดานหนึง่นอยกวา 6 ม.ซึ่งมกีารแบงแยกหรือแบงโอนกอนกฎกระทรวงใชบังคับ (ง) บานแถว หองแถว และตึกแถว ใหมีระยะถอยรนไมนอยกวา 6 ม. (จ) บานแถว หองแถว และตึกแถว ใหมีขนาดตํ่าสุดของแปลงที่ดินไมนอยกวา 20 ตร.ว.

หมายเหตุ ตารางสรุปขอกําหนดนี้ไดจัดทําข้ึนดวยวิธกีารสรปุสาระสําคัญมาจากกฎกระทรวงใหใชบังคับผังเมืองรวมกรงุเทพมหานคร พ.ศ. .... โดยมีวัตถุประสงคเพื่ออํานวยความสะดวกสําหรับใชเปนคูมอืปฏิบัติการใหเปนไปตามกฎกระทรวงดังกลาว หากปรากฏขอความ ขอกฎหมาย หรือขอเท็จจรงิประการใดที่ขัดหรือแยงกับกฎกระทรวงดังกลาวแลว ใหยึดถือขอความในกฎกระทรวงและบัญชีทายกฎกระทรวงใหใชบังคับผังเมืองรวมกรงุเทพมหานคร พ.ศ. .... เปนหลัก

APPENDIX C :

Bangkok Zoning Interpretation (Department of City Planning , 2012b; translated by author)

Land use R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 R10 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 I1 I2 I3 A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 C1 C2

Landed house

Semi-detached house

Terrace house

Shop house

Condominium Floor area up to 1,000 m2

Condominium Floor area up to 2,000 m2

Condominium Floor area up to 5,000 m2

Condominium Floor area up to 10,000 m2

Condominium Floor area more than 10,000 m2

Commercial shop house

Commercial Floor area up to 100 m2

Office Floor area up to 100 m2

Commercial Floor area up to 300 m2

Office Floor area up to 300 m2

Commercial Floor area up to 500 m2

Office Floor area up to 500 m2

Commercial Floor area up to 1,000 m2

Office Floor area up to 1,000 m2

Market Floor area up to 1,000 m2

Commercial Floor area up to 2,000 m2

Office Floor area up to 2,000 m2

Market Floor area up to 2,500 m2

Commercial Floor area up to 5,000 m2

Office Floor area up to 5,000 m2

Market Floor area up to 5,000 m2

Market Floor area more than 5,000 m2

Petrol station

Petrol depot

Natural gas station

Convention centre

Facilities

Theatre

Amusement park

Race track

Horse race track

Shooting range

LPG station

Gas depot station

Commercial Floor area up to 10,000 m2

Office Floor area up to 10,000 m2

Commercial Floor area more than 10,000 m2

Office Floor area more than 10,000 m2

Hotel up to 50 rooms

Hotel up to 80 rooms

Hotel more than 80 rooms

Office shop house

R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 R10 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 I1 I2 I3 A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 C1 C2

59

สรุปขอกําหนดการใชประโยชนที่ดินตามกฎกระทรวงใหใชบงัคับผังเมืองรวมกรงุเทพมหานคร พ.ศ. ....

การใชประโยชนที่ดินประเภท ย.1 ย.2 ย.3 ย.4 ย.5 ย.6 ย.7 ย.8 ย.9 ย.10 พ.1 พ.2 พ.3 พ.4 พ.5 อ.1 อ.2 อ.3 ก.1 ก.2 ก.3 ก.4 ก.5 ศ.1 ศ.2ท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทบานเดี่ยว ท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทบานแฝด x x x x x ท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทบานแถว x 1 x x x x ท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทหองแถว ตึกแถว x 2 x x x x ท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทอาคารอยูอาศัยรวม พื้นท่ีไมเกิน 1,000 ตารางเมตร x 2 x x x x 4 ท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทอาคารอยูอาศัยรวม พื้นท่ีไมเกิน 2,000 ตารางเมตร x x 3 x x x x x x x xท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทอาคารอยูอาศัยรวม พื้นท่ีไมเกิน 5,000 ตารางเมตร x x 3 1* x x x x x x x x x xท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทอาคารอยูอาศัยรวม พื้นท่ีไมเกิน 10,000 ตารางเมตร x x 3 1* x 2 2 x x x x x x x x x xท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทอาคารอยูอาศัยรวม พื้นท่ีเกิน 10,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x 3 3 3 x 3 3 x x x x x x x x x xพาณิชยกรรมประเภทหองแถว ตึกแถว x 2 1 x x x x พาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 100 ตารางเมตร พาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 300 ตารางเมตร x 2 2 2 2 2 พาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 500 ตารางเมตร x 3 2 2 x x x x x 3 2 พาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 1,000 ตารางเมตร x x 3 3 x x x x x x 3 พาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 2,000 ตารางเมตร x x x 2 x x x x x x x x x 2พาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 5,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x 2 x x x x x x x x x xพาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 10,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x 3 3 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 x x x x x x x x x xพาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีเกิน 10,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x x x 3 3 2 2 x 3 3 2 2 x x x x x x x x x xสํานักงานประเภทหองแถว ตึกแถว x 2 1 x x x x สํานักงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 100 ตารางเมตร สํานักงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 300 ตารางเมตร x 2 x 2 x x 1 สํานักงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 500 ตารางเมตร x x 2 1 1 x x x x x x สํานักงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 1,000 ตารางเมตร x x x 2 1 x x x x x x x x สํานักงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 2,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x x 2 2 1 x x x x x x x x xสํานักงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 5,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x x 3 2 2 x x x x x x x x xสํานักงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 10,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x x x 2 3 2 2 2 x x x x x x x x x 2สํานักงานพื้นท่ีเกิน 10,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x x x x x 2 1 x 3 3 2 1 x x x x x x x x x xโรงแรมไมเกิน 50 หอง x 2 2 2 x x x x x x x x โรงแรมไมเกิน 80 หอง x 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 x x x x x x x x xโรงแรมเกิน 80 หอง x 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 x x x x x x x x x xตลาดพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 1,000 ตารางเมตร 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 x x x 1 1 1 1 1 1 1ตลาดพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 2,500 ตารางเมตร x x 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 x x x x x x 2 2 x xตลาดพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 5,000 ตารางเมตร x x 3 3 3 3 3 x x x 3 3 3 x x x x x x x x 3 3 x xตลาดพื้นท่ีเกิน 5,000 ตารางเมตร x x 3 3 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 3 3 x xคลังนํ้ามันเชื้อเพลิง/สถานท่ีเก็บนํ้ามันเช้ือเพลิงเพื่อจําหนาย x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 3 x x xสถานีบริการนํ้ามันเชื้อเพลิง 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 x xสถานท่ีบรรจุกาซ/สถานท่ีเก็บกาซ/หองบรรจุกาซ 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11สถานีบริการกาซปโตรเลียมเหลว x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 3 x x xสถานีบริการกาซธรรมชาต ิ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 x 1 1 1 1 1 1 x xศูนยประชุม/อาคารแสดงสินคา/นิทรรศการ x x 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 2 2 x x x x x x x x x xสถานบริการ x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xโรงมหรสพ x x x 3 3 3 3 3 x x x x x x x x 2 2สวนสนุก x x 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 x x x x x x 3 3 x xสนามแขงรถ x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xสนามแขงมา x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xสนามยิงปน x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xสวนสัตว x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 3 x x xสถานสงเคราะหหรือรับเลี้ยงสัตว x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xโรงงานประเภทหองแถว ตึกแถว x x 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 x x 9 9 9 x x x x 9 x xโรงงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 100 ตารางเมตร x 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 x 9 9 9 x xโรงงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 300 ตารางเมตร x x 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 x x x 5 5 x xโรงงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 500 ตารางเมตร x x x x 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 x x x 5 5 x xโรงงานพื้นท่ีเกิน 500 ตารางเมตร x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 9 9 x x x x x x x xหนวยงานคอนกรีตผสมเสร็จ (ช่ัวคราว) x x 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 x x 10 10 x xโรงฆาสัตว/โรงพักสัตว x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xไซโลเก็บผลิตผลทางการเกษตร x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xการเลี้ยงสัตวเพื่อการคา x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xการเพาะเลี้ยงสัตวนํ้าเค็ม/นํ้ากรอย x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 4 x x xสถานีขนสงผูโดยสาร 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 x x x x 2 x x 2 x xสถานท่ีเก็บ/สถานีรับสง/กิจการรับสงสินคา x x x x 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 x x x 3 3 x xการซ้ือขาย/เก็บช้ินสวนเคร่ืองจักรกลเกา x x x 2 2 2 2 x x x 2 2 x x x x x x x x xการซ้ือขาย/เก็บเศษวัสดุพื้นท่ีเกิน 100 ตารางเมตร (เปนอาคารปด) x 2 2 2 2 2 2 x x x x x x x x x 2 x 2 2 2 x xการกําจัดสิ่งปฏิกูลและมูลฝอย x 6 6 6 x x x x x x x x x x x 6 6 6 x x x 6 6 x xการกําจัดวัตถุอันตราย x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 5 5 5 5 x x 5 x x xสุสาน/ฌาปนสถาน 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 7 7สถานศึกษาระดับต่ํากวาอุดม/อาชีวศึกษา x x 8 8 8 สถานศึกษาระดับอุดม/อาชีวศึกษา x x x x 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 x x x x x x x x 2 2สถานพยาบาล 5 5 8 8 สถานสงเคราะหหรือรับเลี้ยงเด็ก x x x สถานสงเคราะหหรือรับเลี้ยงคนชรา x x x สถานสงเคราะหหรือรับเลี้ยงคนพิการ x x x ปายโฆษณา 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 x 4 4 4 x xท่ีพักอาศัยช่ัวคราวสําหรับคนงาน 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

อัตราสวนพ้ืนท่ีอาคารรวมตอพื้นท่ีดิน – FAR (ก) (ตอ 1) 1 1.5 2.5 3 4 4.5 5 6 7 8 5 6 7 8 10 2 1.5 1 0.5 1 0.5 1 1 3 4

อัตราสวนพ้ืนท่ีวางตอพื้นท่ีอาคารรวม – OSR(ข) (รอยละ) 40 20 12.5 10 7.5 6.5 6 5 4.5 4 6 5 4.5 4 3 15 20 40 100 40 100 40 40 10 7.5

ท่ีวางดานหนาอาคาร (เมตร) (ค) 2 2 (ง)

2 2 2 2 2

ท่ีวางดานขางอาคาร (เมตร) (ค) 2 1 1 2 1 1 1

ท่ีวางดานหลังอาคาร (เมตร) (ค) 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

ขนาดแปลงท่ีดินต่ําสดุในโครงการจัดสรรฯ (ตารางวา) 100 50 (จ)

1,000 100 1,000 100

ความสูงสูงสดุ (เมตร) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12

เงื่อนไข X = ไมอนุญาต

1* = เงื่อนไขต้ังอยูริมถนนที่มีเขตทางไมนอยกวา 10 ม./หรืออยูในระยะ 500 ม. จากสถานีรถไฟฟาขนสงมวลชน 4 = เงื่อนไขเรื่องที่ต้ัง 8 = เงื่อนไขเรื่องขนาด/ระดับการบริการ 1 = เงื่อนไขต้ังอยูริมถนนที่มีเขตทางไมนอยกวา 12 ม./หรืออยูในระยะ 500 ม. จากสถานีรถไฟฟาขนสงมวลชน 5 = เงื่อนไขความเกีย่วเนื่องของกิจกรรม 9 = เงื่อนไขตามบัญชีทายกฎกระทรวงฯ 2 = เงื่อนไขต้ังอยูริมถนนที่มีเขตทางไมนอยกวา 16 ม./หรืออยูในระยะ 500 ม. จากสถานีรถไฟฟาขนสงมวลชน 6 = เงื่อนไขภายใตการควบคุม/อนุญาต กทม. 10 = เงื่อนไขต้ังช่ัวคราวในหนวยสถานทีก่อสรางหรือบริเวณใกลเคียง 3 = เงื่อนไขต้ังอยูริมถนนที่มีเขตทางไมนอยกวา 30 ม./หรืออยูในระยะ 500 ม. จากสถานีรถไฟฟาขนสงมวลชน 7 = เงื่อนไขทดแทนของเดิม 11 = เงื่อนไขเวนกิจการบางประเภทที่ระบุไวในกฎกระทรวงฯ (ก) FAR (Floor Area Ratio) “อัตราสวนพื้นที่อาคารรวมตอพืน้ที่ดิน” หมายความวา อัตราสวนพืน้ที่อาคารรวมทกุช้ันของอาคารทุกหลังตอพืน้ทีดิ่นที่ใชเปนที่ต้ังอาคาร (ไมใชบังคับกับบานเดี่ยวและบานแฝด) (ข) OSR (Open Space Ratio) “อัตราสวนของที่วางตอพื้นที่อาคารรวม” หมายความวา อัตราสวนของทีว่างอันปราศจากส่ิงปกคลุมตอพื้นที่อาคารรวมทุกช้ันของอาคารทุกหลังที่กอสรางในที่ดินแปลงเดียวกัน (ไมใชบังคับกับบานเด่ียวและบานแฝด) (ค) ระยะรนรอบอาคาร ไมใชบังคับกับบานเดี่ยวทีม่ีขนาดแปลงที่ดินนอยกวาแปลงละ 40 ตร.ว.หรือมีดานใดดานหนึง่นอยกวา 6 ม.ซึ่งมกีารแบงแยกหรือแบงโอนกอนกฎกระทรวงใชบังคับ (ง) บานแถว หองแถว และตึกแถว ใหมีระยะถอยรนไมนอยกวา 6 ม. (จ) บานแถว หองแถว และตึกแถว ใหมีขนาดตํ่าสุดของแปลงที่ดินไมนอยกวา 20 ตร.ว.

หมายเหตุ ตารางสรุปขอกําหนดนี้ไดจัดทําข้ึนดวยวิธกีารสรปุสาระสําคัญมาจากกฎกระทรวงใหใชบังคับผังเมืองรวมกรงุเทพมหานคร พ.ศ. .... โดยมีวัตถุประสงคเพื่ออํานวยความสะดวกสําหรับใชเปนคูมอืปฏิบัติการใหเปนไปตามกฎกระทรวงดังกลาว หากปรากฏขอความ ขอกฎหมาย หรือขอเท็จจรงิประการใดที่ขัดหรือแยงกับกฎกระทรวงดังกลาวแลว ใหยึดถือขอความในกฎกระทรวงและบัญชีทายกฎกระทรวงใหใชบังคับผังเมืองรวมกรงุเทพมหานคร พ.ศ. .... เปนหลัก

สรุปขอกําหนดการใชประโยชนที่ดินตามกฎกระทรวงใหใชบงัคับผังเมืองรวมกรงุเทพมหานคร พ.ศ. ....

การใชประโยชนที่ดินประเภท ย.1 ย.2 ย.3 ย.4 ย.5 ย.6 ย.7 ย.8 ย.9 ย.10 พ.1 พ.2 พ.3 พ.4 พ.5 อ.1 อ.2 อ.3 ก.1 ก.2 ก.3 ก.4 ก.5 ศ.1 ศ.2ท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทบานเดี่ยว ท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทบานแฝด x x x x x ท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทบานแถว x 1 x x x x ท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทหองแถว ตึกแถว x 2 x x x x ท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทอาคารอยูอาศัยรวม พื้นท่ีไมเกิน 1,000 ตารางเมตร x 2 x x x x 4 ท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทอาคารอยูอาศัยรวม พื้นท่ีไมเกิน 2,000 ตารางเมตร x x 3 x x x x x x x xท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทอาคารอยูอาศัยรวม พื้นท่ีไมเกิน 5,000 ตารางเมตร x x 3 1* x x x x x x x x x xท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทอาคารอยูอาศัยรวม พื้นท่ีไมเกิน 10,000 ตารางเมตร x x 3 1* x 2 2 x x x x x x x x x xท่ีอยูอาศัยประเภทอาคารอยูอาศัยรวม พื้นท่ีเกิน 10,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x 3 3 3 x 3 3 x x x x x x x x x xพาณิชยกรรมประเภทหองแถว ตึกแถว x 2 1 x x x x พาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 100 ตารางเมตร พาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 300 ตารางเมตร x 2 2 2 2 2 พาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 500 ตารางเมตร x 3 2 2 x x x x x 3 2 พาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 1,000 ตารางเมตร x x 3 3 x x x x x x 3 พาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 2,000 ตารางเมตร x x x 2 x x x x x x x x x 2พาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 5,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x 2 x x x x x x x x x xพาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 10,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x 3 3 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 x x x x x x x x x xพาณิชยกรรมพื้นท่ีเกิน 10,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x x x 3 3 2 2 x 3 3 2 2 x x x x x x x x x xสํานักงานประเภทหองแถว ตึกแถว x 2 1 x x x x สํานักงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 100 ตารางเมตร สํานักงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 300 ตารางเมตร x 2 x 2 x x 1 สํานักงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 500 ตารางเมตร x x 2 1 1 x x x x x x สํานักงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 1,000 ตารางเมตร x x x 2 1 x x x x x x x x สํานักงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 2,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x x 2 2 1 x x x x x x x x xสํานักงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 5,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x x 3 2 2 x x x x x x x x xสํานักงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 10,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x x x 2 3 2 2 2 x x x x x x x x x 2สํานักงานพื้นท่ีเกิน 10,000 ตารางเมตร x x x x x x x x 2 1 x 3 3 2 1 x x x x x x x x x xโรงแรมไมเกิน 50 หอง x 2 2 2 x x x x x x x x โรงแรมไมเกิน 80 หอง x 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 x x x x x x x x xโรงแรมเกิน 80 หอง x 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 x x x x x x x x x xตลาดพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 1,000 ตารางเมตร 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 x x x 1 1 1 1 1 1 1ตลาดพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 2,500 ตารางเมตร x x 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 x x x x x x 2 2 x xตลาดพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 5,000 ตารางเมตร x x 3 3 3 3 3 x x x 3 3 3 x x x x x x x x 3 3 x xตลาดพื้นท่ีเกิน 5,000 ตารางเมตร x x 3 3 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 3 3 x xคลังนํ้ามันเชื้อเพลิง/สถานท่ีเก็บนํ้ามันเช้ือเพลิงเพื่อจําหนาย x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 3 x x xสถานีบริการนํ้ามันเชื้อเพลิง 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 x xสถานท่ีบรรจุกาซ/สถานท่ีเก็บกาซ/หองบรรจุกาซ 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11สถานีบริการกาซปโตรเลียมเหลว x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 3 x x xสถานีบริการกาซธรรมชาต ิ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 x 1 1 1 1 1 1 x xศูนยประชุม/อาคารแสดงสินคา/นิทรรศการ x x 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 2 2 x x x x x x x x x xสถานบริการ x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xโรงมหรสพ x x x 3 3 3 3 3 x x x x x x x x 2 2สวนสนุก x x 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 x x x x x x 3 3 x xสนามแขงรถ x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xสนามแขงมา x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xสนามยิงปน x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xสวนสัตว x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 3 x x xสถานสงเคราะหหรือรับเลี้ยงสัตว x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xโรงงานประเภทหองแถว ตึกแถว x x 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 x x 9 9 9 x x x x 9 x xโรงงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 100 ตารางเมตร x 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 x 9 9 9 x xโรงงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 300 ตารางเมตร x x 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 x x x 5 5 x xโรงงานพื้นท่ีไมเกิน 500 ตารางเมตร x x x x 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 x x x 5 5 x xโรงงานพื้นท่ีเกิน 500 ตารางเมตร x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 9 9 x x x x x x x xหนวยงานคอนกรีตผสมเสร็จ (ช่ัวคราว) x x 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 x x 10 10 x xโรงฆาสัตว/โรงพักสัตว x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xไซโลเก็บผลิตผลทางการเกษตร x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xการเลี้ยงสัตวเพื่อการคา x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xการเพาะเลี้ยงสัตวนํ้าเค็ม/นํ้ากรอย x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 4 x x xสถานีขนสงผูโดยสาร 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 x x x x 2 x x 2 x xสถานท่ีเก็บ/สถานีรับสง/กิจการรับสงสินคา x x x x 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 x x x 3 3 x xการซ้ือขาย/เก็บช้ินสวนเคร่ืองจักรกลเกา x x x 2 2 2 2 x x x 2 2 x x x x x x x x xการซ้ือขาย/เก็บเศษวัสดุพื้นท่ีเกิน 100 ตารางเมตร (เปนอาคารปด) x 2 2 2 2 2 2 x x x x x x x x x 2 x 2 2 2 x xการกําจัดสิ่งปฏิกูลและมูลฝอย x 6 6 6 x x x x x x x x x x x 6 6 6 x x x 6 6 x xการกําจัดวัตถุอันตราย x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 5 5 5 5 x x 5 x x xสุสาน/ฌาปนสถาน 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 7 7สถานศึกษาระดับต่ํากวาอุดม/อาชีวศึกษา x x 8 8 8 สถานศึกษาระดับอุดม/อาชีวศึกษา x x x x 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 x x x x x x x x 2 2สถานพยาบาล 5 5 8 8 สถานสงเคราะหหรือรับเลี้ยงเด็ก x x x สถานสงเคราะหหรือรับเลี้ยงคนชรา x x x สถานสงเคราะหหรือรับเลี้ยงคนพิการ x x x ปายโฆษณา 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 x 4 4 4 x xท่ีพักอาศัยช่ัวคราวสําหรับคนงาน 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

อัตราสวนพ้ืนท่ีอาคารรวมตอพื้นท่ีดิน – FAR (ก) (ตอ 1) 1 1.5 2.5 3 4 4.5 5 6 7 8 5 6 7 8 10 2 1.5 1 0.5 1 0.5 1 1 3 4

อัตราสวนพ้ืนท่ีวางตอพื้นท่ีอาคารรวม – OSR(ข) (รอยละ) 40 20 12.5 10 7.5 6.5 6 5 4.5 4 6 5 4.5 4 3 15 20 40 100 40 100 40 40 10 7.5

ท่ีวางดานหนาอาคาร (เมตร) (ค) 2 2 (ง)

2 2 2 2 2

ท่ีวางดานขางอาคาร (เมตร) (ค) 2 1 1 2 1 1 1

ท่ีวางดานหลังอาคาร (เมตร) (ค) 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

ขนาดแปลงท่ีดินต่ําสดุในโครงการจัดสรรฯ (ตารางวา) 100 50 (จ)

1,000 100 1,000 100

ความสูงสูงสดุ (เมตร) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12

เงื่อนไข X = ไมอนุญาต

1* = เงื่อนไขต้ังอยูริมถนนที่มีเขตทางไมนอยกวา 10 ม./หรืออยูในระยะ 500 ม. จากสถานีรถไฟฟาขนสงมวลชน 4 = เงื่อนไขเรื่องที่ต้ัง 8 = เงื่อนไขเรื่องขนาด/ระดับการบริการ 1 = เงื่อนไขต้ังอยูริมถนนที่มีเขตทางไมนอยกวา 12 ม./หรืออยูในระยะ 500 ม. จากสถานีรถไฟฟาขนสงมวลชน 5 = เงื่อนไขความเกี่ยวเนื่องของกิจกรรม 9 = เงื่อนไขตามบัญชีทายกฎกระทรวงฯ 2 = เงื่อนไขต้ังอยูริมถนนที่มีเขตทางไมนอยกวา 16 ม./หรืออยูในระยะ 500 ม. จากสถานีรถไฟฟาขนสงมวลชน 6 = เงื่อนไขภายใตการควบคุม/อนุญาต กทม. 10 = เงื่อนไขต้ังช่ัวคราวในหนวยสถานทีก่อสรางหรือบริเวณใกลเคียง 3 = เงื่อนไขต้ังอยูริมถนนที่มีเขตทางไมนอยกวา 30 ม./หรืออยูในระยะ 500 ม. จากสถานีรถไฟฟาขนสงมวลชน 7 = เงื่อนไขทดแทนของเดิม 11 = เงื่อนไขเวนกิจการบางประเภทที่ระบุไวในกฎกระทรวงฯ (ก) FAR (Floor Area Ratio) “อัตราสวนพื้นที่อาคารรวมตอพืน้ที่ดิน” หมายความวา อัตราสวนพืน้ที่อาคารรวมทกุช้ันของอาคารทุกหลังตอพืน้ทีดิ่นที่ใชเปนที่ต้ังอาคาร (ไมใชบังคับกับบานเดี่ยวและบานแฝด) (ข) OSR (Open Space Ratio) “อัตราสวนของที่วางตอพื้นที่อาคารรวม” หมายความวา อัตราสวนของทีว่างอันปราศจากส่ิงปกคลุมตอพื้นที่อาคารรวมทุกช้ันของอาคารทุกหลังที่กอสรางในที่ดินแปลงเดียวกัน (ไมใชบังคับกับบานเด่ียวและบานแฝด) (ค) ระยะรนรอบอาคาร ไมใชบังคับกับบานเดี่ยวทีม่ีขนาดแปลงที่ดินนอยกวาแปลงละ 40 ตร.ว.หรือมีดานใดดานหนึง่นอยกวา 6 ม.ซึ่งมกีารแบงแยกหรือแบงโอนกอนกฎกระทรวงใชบังคับ (ง) บานแถว หองแถว และตึกแถว ใหมีระยะถอยรนไมนอยกวา 6 ม. (จ) บานแถว หองแถว และตึกแถว ใหมีขนาดตํ่าสุดของแปลงที่ดินไมนอยกวา 20 ตร.ว.

หมายเหตุ ตารางสรุปขอกําหนดนี้ไดจัดทําข้ึนดวยวิธกีารสรปุสาระสําคัญมาจากกฎกระทรวงใหใชบังคับผังเมืองรวมกรงุเทพมหานคร พ.ศ. .... โดยมีวัตถุประสงคเพื่ออํานวยความสะดวกสําหรับใชเปนคูมอืปฏิบัติการใหเปนไปตามกฎกระทรวงดังกลาว หากปรากฏขอความ ขอกฎหมาย หรือขอเท็จจรงิประการใดที่ขัดหรือแยงกับกฎกระทรวงดังกลาวแลว ใหยึดถือขอความในกฎกระทรวงและบัญชีทายกฎกระทรวงใหใชบังคับผังเมืองรวมกรงุเทพมหานคร พ.ศ. .... เปนหลัก

Zoo

Animal shelter

Industrial shop house

Industrial Floor area up to 100 m2

Industrial Floor area up to 300 m2

Industrial Floor area up to 500 m2

Industrial Floor area more than 500 m2

Ready mixed concrete factory

Slaughterhouse

Silo for agricultural products

Ranch

Aquaculture

Transit terminal

Recycle - Mechanical

Recycle plant Floor area up to 100 m2

Waste management plant

Hazardous waste management plant

Crematory

Institution up to secondary level

Institution higher level

Healthcare facilities

Children institutional care

Elderly institutional care

Handicap institutional care

Billboard

Temporary housing for workers

Smaller plot allowance in development (wa)

Hight limited (m)

Not allow

If locate adjacent to street not smaller than 10 m or within 500 m from mass rail transit Condition of location Condition of size and services

Condition of activities Condition under regulation

Condition under Bangkok guideline Condition under temporary guideline

Condition of redevelopment Condition of exemption according to regulation

If locate adjacent to street not smaller than 12 m or within 500 m from mass rail transit

If locate adjacent to street not smaller than 16 m or within 500 m from mass rail transit

If locate adjacent to street not smaller than 30 m or within 500 m from mass rail transit

(A) Floor area ratio (FAR) - Ratio of gross floor area to site area (not applicable to landed house or semi-detached house)

(B) Open space ratio (OSR) - Ratio of open space without any cover to gross floor area of all building in the same development plot (not applicable to landed house or semi-detached house)

(C) Set back around building - not applicable to landed house with plot less than 40 wa2 or plot with less than 6 m. length

(D) Terrace house and shop house shall have set back not less than 6 m.

(E) Terrace house and shop house shall minimum plot of 20 wa2

Floor area ratio (per 1 unit) (A)

Open space ratio (per 100 unit) (B)

Open space in front of building (m) (C)

Open space on the side of building (m) (C)

(D)

(E)

Open space behind the building (m) (C)

Distribution and logistics centre

Land use R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 R10 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 I1 I2 I3 A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 C1 C2

60

APPENDIX D :

Bishan Site Photos

IMAGE E : Community space in front of community centre IMAGE H : Study area underneath HDB buildingIMAGE B : Undercovered connection between Junction 8 and bus interchange station

IMAGE D : Recreational space insert within HDB complex IMAGE G :Covered walkway to bus stopIMAGE A : Bishan main MRT entrance

IMAGE C : Playground insert within HDB complex IMAGE F : Direct access to bus stop from landed house

61

APPENDIX E :

Mochit Site Photos

IMAGE J : Limited space on footpath IMAGE L : Bus stop area adjacent to Mochit station

IMAGE I : Parking in sois (Source: Google Street View)

IMAGE K : Adjacency between BTS and MRT

62

APPENDIX F :

Parking Requirements At Commercial Buildings (On Average) Versus

Approximate Car Ownership (Barter, 2010)

63

APPENDIX G :

Bangkok Parking Regulations (MOI, 2012; translated by author)

TRANSLATED :

ITEM 2 Buildings which require parking, vehicle turnabout, vehicle

access are as follow;

(1) Theatre with over 500 seats

(2) Hotel with convention or commercial space over 300 m2

(3) Condominium with space over 60 m2 for each dwelling

(4) Restaurant with area for seating over 150 m2

(5) Department Store with area over 300 m2

(6) Office with area over 300 m2

(7) Large building with gross floor area over 2,000 m2

(8) Restaurant in (4), large building in (7), the hotel in (2), or the hotel that

can be considered as large building in (7) but locates in natural site that cannot be

accessed by vehicles are exempted.

ITEM 3 Minimum number of parking lot are as follow;

(1) Within Bangkok

(A) Theatre – 1 parking space for 20 seats unless locates in city centre, 1

parking space is required for 10 seats

(B) Hotel – 1 parking space for convention space of 10 m2 and 1 parking

space for commercial space of 20 m2

(C) Condominium – 1 parking space for 1 dwelling

(D) Restaurant – Restaurant with seating area less than 750 m2 shall have

at least 1 parking space for every 15 m2. Restaurant with seating area more

than 750 m2 shall have at least 1 parking space for every 30 m2

(E) Department Store – 1 parking space for every 20 m2

(F) Office – 1 parking space for every 60 m2

(G) Convention space as in ITEM 2 (8) shall have at least 1 parking space

for every 10 m2

(H) Large building – shall have parking as indicated for each type of

building, or have at least 1 parking space for 120 m2.

ORIGINAL :

ข้อ 2 ให้กำาหนดประเภทของอาคารซึ่งต้องมีที่จอดรถยนต์ ที่กลับรถยนต์ และ

ทางเข้าออกรถยนต์ไว้ ดังต่อไปนี้

(1) โรงมหรสพที่มีพื้นที่สำาหรับจัดที่นั่งสำาหรับคนดูตั้งแต่ 500 ที่ขึ้นไป

(2) โรงแรมที่มีพื้นที่ห้องโถงหรือพื้นที่ที่ใช้เพื่อกิจการพาณิชยกรรมในหลังเดียวกันหรือ

หลายหลังรวมกัน ตั้งแต่ 300 ตารางเมตรขึ้นไป

(3) อาคารชุดที่มีพื้นที่แต่ละครอบครัวตั้งแต่ 60 ตารางเมตรขึ้นไป

(4) ภัตตาคารที่มีพื้นที่สำาหรับตั้งโต๊ะอาหารตั้งแต่ 150 ตารางเมตรขึ้นไป

(5) ห้างสรรพสินค้าที่มีพื้นที่ตั้งแต่ 300 ตารางเมตรขึ้นไป

(6) สำานักงานที่มีพื้นที่ตั้งแต่ 300 ตารางเมตรขึ้นไป

(7) อาคารขนาดใหญ่

(8) ห้องโถงของภัตตาคารตาม (4) หรืออาคารขนาดใหญ่ตาม (7) ในกรณีที่โรงแรมตาม

(2) หรือโรงแรมที่มีลักษณะเป็นอาคารขนาดใหญ่ตาม (7) ตั้งอยู่ในพื้นที่ที่ตามสภาพธรรมชาติ

ไม่สามารถนำารถยนต์เข้าไปใช้ได้ จะไม่จัดให้มีที่จอดรถยนต์ ที่กลับรถยนต์ และทางเข้าออก

ของรถยนต์ก็ได้

ข้อ 3 จำานวนที่จอดรถยนต์ ต้องจัดให้มีตามกำาหนดดังต่อไปนี้

(1) ในเขตท้องที่กรุงเทพมหานคร

(ก) โรงมหรสพ ให้มีที่จอดรถยนต์ไม่น้อยกว่า 1 คันต่อจำานวนที่นั่งสำาหรับคนดู

20 ที่ โรงมหรสพที่อยู่ในท้องที่ของเขตพระนคร เขตธนบุรี เขตบางรัก เขตปทุมวัน เขต

ป้อมปราบศัตรูพ่าย และเขตสัมพันธวงศ์ ให้มีที่จอดรถยนต์ไม่น้อยกว่า 1 คันต่อจำานวนที่

นั่งสำาหรับคนดู 10 ที่

(ข) โรงแรม ให้มีที่จอดรถยนต์ไม่น้อยกว่า 1 คันต่อพื้นที่ห้องโถง 10 ตารางเมตร เ

และไม่น้อยกว่า 1 คันต่อพื้นที่ที่ใช้เพื่อกิจการพาณิชยกรรม 20 ตารางเมตร

(ค) อาคารชุด ให้มีที่จอดรถยนต์ไม่น้อยกว่า 1 คันต่อ 1 ครอบครัว

(ง) ภัตตาคาร ภัตตาคารที่มีพื้นที่ตั้งโต๊ะอาหารไม่เกิน 750 ตารางเมตร ให้มีที่จอด

รถยนต์ไม่น้อยกว่า 1 คันต่อพื้นที่ตั้งโต๊ะอาหาร 15 ตารางเมตร ภัตตาคารที่มีพื้นที่ตั้งโต๊ะ

อาหารเกิน 750 ตารางเมตร ให้มีที่จอดรถยนต์ตามอัตราที่กำาหนดในวรรคหนึ่งสำาหรับ

พื้นที่ตั้งโต๊ะอาหาร 750 ตารางเมตรแรก ส่วนที่เกิน 750 ตารางเมตรให้คิดอัตรา 1 คันต่อ

30 ตารางเมตร

(จ) ห้างสรรพสินค้า ให้มีที่จอดรถยนต์ไม่น้อยกว่า 1 คันต่อพื้นที่ 20 ตารางเมตร

(ฉ) สำานักงาน ให้มีที่จอดรถยนต์ไม่น้อยกว่า 1 คันต่อพื้นที่ 60 ตารางเมตร

(ช) ห้องโถงของภัตตาคารหรืออาคารขนาดใหญ่ตามข้อ 2(8) ให้มีที่จอดรถยนต์ไม่

น้อยกว่า 1 คัน ต่อพื้นที่ห้องโถง 10 ตารางเมตร

(ซ) อาคารขนาดใหญ่ ให้มีที่จอดรถยนต์ตามจำานวนที่กำาหนดของแต่ละประเภทของ

อาคารที่ใช้เป็นที่ประกอบกิจการในอาคารขนาดใหญ่นั้นรวมกัน หรือให้มีที่จอดรถยนต์ไม่

น้อยกว่า 1 คันต่อพื้นที่อาคาร 120 ตารางเมตร

64

APPENDIX H :

Interview Questions (Translate by author)

Singapore Questions

1. Would you say Singapore urban and transport planning is successful? Why?

2. What do you think are the main obstacles or assistance to Singapore planning

success?

3. In your opinion, how would you define sustainable transport?

4. Would you consider Singapore as having a ‘sustainable transport’? Why?

5. What are the principles for urban planning for Singapore? How about for

neighbourhood area?

6. Do you think these principles can benefit other developing cities in South East

Asia? Why?

7. Would you be able to briefly explain the planning process?

Name : Yin Hui

Position: Principle Transport Planner, Strategic Planning – Land Transport Authorities

Date : 10 June 2014

We are glad you have chosen Singapore as a successful example for sustainable

urban development, and would be happy to share experiences from the transport

planning perspective. We suggest you read through the recently published Land

Transport Master Plan 2013 (LTMP2013), which can be downloaded online at

http://www.lta.gov.sg/content/ltaweb/en/about-lta/what-we-do/ltmp2013.

html. The LTMP2013 lays out in detail Singapore’s transport challenges, strategies

and initiatives for the next 10 to 15 years. We hope you would gain more insights

from it, and would be happy to clarify further if you do require.

Meantime, we would also like to advise you to touch base with the Urban

Redevelopment Authority (URA) of Singapore as URA is the leading landuse planning

agency in Singapore.

Date : 10 June 2014

Like all major cities with land constraints such as London, Hong Kong and New

York, public transport will have to be the main mode of travel in Singapore. It is

the most space-efficient and environmentally-sustainable option. Here in our city-

state, about 63 per cent of all trips during the peak periods are made on public

transport. Our aim is that 75 per cent of trips during both the morning and evening

peak hours will be made by public transport by 2030.

As for the rest of your questions, I apologize that it is beyond my capacity to

comment on them.

Name : Hengky Tay

Position: Planner, Physical planning, Infrastructure – Urban Redevelopment

Authority

Date : 5 June 2014

Thank you for your email as well as your interest in our Master Plan.

The Master Plan review process is very much driven by planners from the Physical

Planning Group (PPG) and architects from the Conservation and Urban Design

Group (CUDG) in consultation with other land use and infrastructure agencies such

as the Land Transport Authority (LTA).

We have recently completed the review of the Master Plan and transport is one of

the key planning strategy. You may also wish to note and refer to LTA’s recent review

and announcement on the Land Transport Master Plan 2013 (http://www.lta.gov.

sg/content/ltaweb/en/about-lta/what-we-do/ltmp2013.html) which details some

of the key strategies for land transport up to 2030.

To support sustainable transport and optimise land use, some complementary land

use planning strategies that URA have employed includes:

1.Zoning for higher density uses around public transit stations; and

2.Encouraging more integration of uses or mixed uses around transport nodes (such

as integrated transport hubs and MRT stations)

Going forward, some new land use strategies that we have recently announced in

our Draft Master Plan 2013 exhibition include:

1.Car reduced districts to reduce dependency on private transport nodes;

2.Fenceless districts and covered linkways to encourage more walking towards

public transport nodes; and

3.Intra-town and inter-town bicycle routes to allow cycling to serve as first and last

mile connecting modes to public transport nodes

We hope the above provides you sufficient information and insights for your

research. But should you require more information, please do not hesitate to

contact me directly.

65

Common URA response

Date : 8 July 2014

As a small island city-state, Singapore has to cater to multiple needs, ranging from

economic and social to infrastructure needs.

Besides catering for housing, business, social and recreational needs, activities

that are typically located outside the city such as airports and seaports, water

catchment plants and power plants have to be accommodated within Singapore’s

limited land area. Hence, we take a holistic and long term approach to land use

planning in Singapore.

The planning process starts with the Concept Plan, which is a strategic land use

and transportation plan that guides Singapore’s development over the next 40-50

years. The Concept Plan is reviewed every 10 years and it is a multi-agency effort

to ensure that social, economic and environmental considerations are taken into

account.

Each review begins by projecting a possible long term population range which takes

into account a reasonable projected labour productivity growth, demographic trends

and projected labour force required to support Singapore’s long term economic

growth strategy. Based on these long term parameters, we work with relevant

government agencies to determine the land requirements to meet the housing,

economic, healthcare, as well as social and recreational needs of our people. After

which, we comprehensively considered the competing land requirements of the

different needs, assess and resolve the potential trade-offs.

We then devise land use plans to cater to the different land use needs, taking

into consideration their locational requirements and potential synergies. As

Singapore develops and becomes more built up, less land will be available for new

developments. As a result, decisions made on land use will more often than not

impact different stakeholders. While this presents an ever increasing challenge

towards the resolution of potential trade-offs, it also accentuates the importance

of land use planning.

The land use plans will also help guide us to develop the necessary transport and

infrastructural needs that are required to support the future developments such as

Mass Rapid Transit lines, major roads, expressways and utilities. For instance, for

road and rail infrastructure, there is close collaboration between URA and the Land

Transport Authority (LTA) in drawing up our land use plans. This ensures that the

transportation network is well-integrated with land use development.

Given our land scarcity, and that there is a limit to the amount of space that can

be set aside for roads, it is necessary to implement a robust and convenient public

transport network so as to transport large number of people sustainably. Hence,

LTA has planned for an extensive network of MRT lines and bus services across the

island. These ensures that major employment nodes, such as our city centre, are

well-connected to the rest of the island.

The latest Concept Plan review was carried out in 2011 and the review was

extended to take into account discussions undertaken by the National Population

Talent Division (NPTD) on population issues. This population discussion resulted in

the release of the Population White Paper in January 2013, which set out the key

considerations and roadmap for Singapore’s population policies and also projected

Singapore’s potential population by 2030. The Ministry of National Development

(MND) released the Land Use Plan subsequently in the same month to complement

the Population White Paper. The Land Use Plan outlined the strategies to provide

the physical capacity to sustain a high quality living environment for a possible

population range of 6.5 to 6.9 million by 2030. It also set aside land to provide

options beyond 2030, so that our future generations will have room for growth and

opportunities.

The broad strategies and proposals set out in the Land Use Plan have been

translated into detailed plans in the recently gazetted Master Plan 2014, which

guides our development over the next 10 to 15 years. The Master Plan is reviewed

every 5 years, and it is a statutory plan that stipulates the allowable land use and

development intensity for every parcel of land in Singapore.

As part of our Master Plan, we ensure that each housing town, such as Bishan, is

self-sufficient, in terms of the provision of community facilities, such as schools and

parks. We also work with LTA to make sure that the public transport infrastructure

is integrated with developments within the town and adequate to serve the needs

of the towns’ residents. To enhance public accessibility to our public transport

options, we have also planned for higher development intensities around MRT

stations. Through such integrated planning effort and the expansion of our rail

network, LTA projects that by 2030, eight in 10 homes will be within 10-minute

walk of a train station.

To bring our plans to reality, land is released for development through the

Government Land Sales (GLS) programme. The government monitors closely the

various sectors (e.g. commercial/industrial, housing, and the pace of development

is dependent on various factors such as market demand, prevailing market

conditions, and local site considerations.

You can find out more information about out planning process at the following

links:

Planning process: http://www.ura.gov.sg/uol/concept-plan/our-planning-process/

our-planning-process.aspx

Planning principles: http://www.ura.gov.sg/uol/master-plan/vision-and-

principles/our-broad-planning-principles.aspx

Concept Plan: http://www.ura.gov.sg/uol/concept-plan.aspx?p1=View-Concept-

Plan

Master Plan: http://www.ura.gov.sg/uol/master-plan.aspx?p1=View-Master-Plan

You may also want to contact the Land Transport Authority of Singapore (LTA) for

more specific details on Singapore’s transport strategy.

66

Bangkok Questions

1. Would you say Bangkok urban and transport planning is successful? Why?

2. What do you think are the main obstacles or assistance to Bangkok planning

success?

3. In your opinion, how would you define sustainable transport?

4. Would you consider Bangkok as having a ‘sustainable transport’? Why?

5. Do you think it would be possible to transfer strategy from Singapore to help

Bangkok urban and transport planning?

6. What do you think would be the obstacles or assistance to transferring?

Name : Panit Pujinda

Position: Assistant Professor in Urban Planning School – Chulalongkorn University

Date : 6 July 2014

ผมขออนุญาตตอบเป็นภาษาไทยนะครับ จะได้เข้าใจง่าย – ตรงไปตรงมา

I would prefer answering in Thai to ensure the understanding.

Would you say Bangkok urban and transport planning is successful? Why?

ไม่

เนื่องจากไม่มีความเชื่อมโยงระหว่างการวางผังเมืองกับการวางแผนระบบจราจรอย่างเหมาะสม ไม่มีหลัก

ประกันใด ๆ มากำาหนดว่า เมื่อ “ถนนโครงการ” ถูกกำาหนดไว้ใน “ผังเมืองรวมกรุงเทพมหานคร” แล้วถนน

โครงการเหล่านั้นจะได้รับการก่อสร้างตามที่ได้กำาหนดไว้ตามผังเมืองรวม ผู้รับผิดชอบด้านการจราจร

วางแผนและจัดการจราจรด้วยมุมมองด้านการจราจรอย่างเดียว ไม่ได้เอาการผังเมืองเข้ามาเป็นประเด็น

ในการวางแผนและจัดการ คิดเพียงสถานการณ์ปัจจุบันว่ามีการใช้ประโยชน์ที่ดินอย่างไร จึงเกิดการ

จราจรแบบนั้น แต่ไม่ได้มองถึงอนาคต

No.

This is because there is no appropriate connection between city planning and

transport planning. There is no guarantee that the ‘proposed road’ in the

development plan will be constructed as indicated. People responsible for transport

infrastructure only plan with the perspective of transport without consideration

of urban planning, and consider only current land use without future possibilities.

What do you think are the main obstacles or assistance to Bangkok planning

success?

เป็นปัญหาเดียวกับการผังเมืองทุกพื้นที่ในประเทศไทย “ผังเมือง” เป็นงานของ “กรมโยธาฯ” ซึ่งเป็นหน่วย

งานระดับ “กรม” ภายใต้กระทรวงมหาดไทย จึงไม่สามารถสั่งให้หน่วยงานอื่น ๆ ในกระทรวงอื่น ๆ ทำาตาม

ผังเมืองได้ เช่น ไม่สามารถสั่งให้ “กรมทางหลวง” ในสังกัดกระทรวงคมนาคมตัดถนนตามผังเมืองรวมได้

เพราะเป็นหน่วยงานระดับ “กรม” เท่ากัน แถมยังสังกัดคนละกระทรวงอีก

แม้แต่หน่วยงานในกระทรวงมหาดไทยด้วยกัน ยังไม่เชื่อผังเมือง เช่น การไฟฟ้า – การประปา เป็น

รัฐวิสาหกิจเทียบเท่า “กรม” ภายใต้กระทรวงมหาดไทย เขายังไม่ให้บริการไฟฟ้าและประปาตามผังเมือง

รวมเลย

เพราะเราไม่เข้าใจว่า “ผังเมือง” คือการประสานการพัฒนา ทุกหน่วยงานต้องมาร่วมกันทำาผังเมือง พอได้

ฉันทามติออกมาเป็นกฎกระทรวงผังเมืองรวม กทม. แล้ว ทุกหน่วยงานต้องเอาผังเมืองไปติดไว้ที่สำานักงาน

ของตัวเอง แล้วให้บริการตามผังเมือง ไม่ใช่คิดเอาเองว่าจะให้บริการอย่างไร

It is the same as everywhere in Thailand. City planning is responsible by Department

of Public Works and Town & Country Planning (under Ministry of Interior), the

agency is in ‘Department’ level which cannot order other department in another

ministry to follow the development plan. For example, DPT cannot order

Department of Highways which is under Ministry of Transport to construct the

road according to development master plan because they are both in ‘Department’

level, and to worsen the situation they are in different Ministries.

Even the departments under the same Ministry of Interior are not following

development plan, such as Metropolitan Electricity Authority and Metropolitan

Waterworks Authority which are state enterprise equal to ‘Department’ under

Ministry of Interior also do not provide electricity and waterworks according to

the master plan.

Because we do not understand that city planning is the integrated development

that all agencies need to do it together. When reached the consensus of Bangkok

development master plan, all agencies need to post it in their offices and provide

their service according to the plan, not come up with their own service.

In your opinion, how would you define sustainable transport?

มีสองประเด็น

1. ใช้เวลาเดินทางต่อวันไม่เกิน 1.5 – 2 ชม. หนึ่งวันมี 24 ชม พักผ่อน+นอนควรไม่น้อยกว่า 12 ชม มี

เวลาทำางาน 12 ชม. ถ้าเสียเวลาเดินทางเกิน 2 ชม ต่อวัน ก็ไม่ต้องทำาอะไรกันแล้ว

2. ค่าเดินทางไม่เกิน 15% ของเงินเดือน เกณฑ์มาตรฐานโลกกำาหนดว่า ค่าที่พักอาศัย + ค่าเดินทาง ไม่

ควรเกิน 30% ของเงินเดือน จะนับว่ามีคุณภาพชีวิตที่ดี สำาหรับ กทม. ผมเคยดีทีวี เขาบอกว่า ค่าเดินทาง

ประมาณ 23% ของเงินเดือน

There are two factors;

1. Commuting time should not be more than 1.5-2hours per day. There are 24

hours a day, rest and sleep should not be less than 12 hours then work for the rest

12 hours, if commuting consumes more than 2 hours a day then there is no time

left for anything.

2. Commuting should not cost more than 15% of the income. World standard

indicates that accommodation and transport should not be over 30% of income

to be considered as high quality life. I have watch a TV show stated that Bangkok

transport cost around 23% of income.

(Continue)

67

Would you consider Bangkok as having a ‘sustainable transport’? Why?

ไม่ครับ ตามเกณฑ์สองข้อข้างบน คน กทม. เดินทางเกิน 2 ชม. และเสียค่าเดินทางเกิน 15% ของรายได้ต่อ

เดือนกันเป็นจำานวนมาก

No, according to the two previous standards. Most of Bangkokian travel more than

2 hours a day and pay for transportation more than 25% of their income.

Do you think it would be possible to transfer strategy from Singapore to help

Bangkok urban and transport planning?

สิงคโปร์มีมาตรการสำาคัญสามประการคือ

1. ควบคุมจำานวนรถ

2. Congestion charge

3. ใช้ระบบขนส่งมวลชนนำาการพัฒนาเมือง (หลักการใช้โครงสร้างพื้นฐานชี้นำาการพัฒนาเมือง)

ประเทศไทยทำาไม่ได้สักข้อครับ

Singapore has three main strategies, which are;

1. Motor vehicles control

2. Congestion charge

3. Transit oriented development

Thailand could not do a single one.

What do you think would be the obstacles or assistance to transferring?

ทัศนคติของคนไทย คิดว่า “สาธารณะ” รัฐบาลต้องจัดให้ฟรี และ ประชาชนมีสิทธิเสรีภาพที่จะใช้ได้อย่าง

อิสระ

แต่กระบวนทัศน์ในการพัฒนาเมืองแบบสากลคิดต่างกัน สาธารณะคือ ไม่ว่ายากดีมีจนต้องจ่ายไหว และมี

ต้นทุนที่ประชาชนต้องจ่าย (ไม่ใช่ฟรี) อีกทั้งยังต้องใช้งานอย่างถนอม เพื่อให้ประชาชนคนอื่นมาใช้งาน

ได้อย่างเหมาะสมเช่นกัน

Thai’s attitude that ‘public facilities’ needs to be provided by government for

free and people can freely used it, but the urban development in international

perspective view that everyone need to be able to effort and there are initial

capital that people have to invest (not free). They also need to carefully use it for

other people to use it in the future too.

68

APPENDIX I :

Reserved Land Initiative

The initiative does not directly serve automobile independency and hence

exclude from the main body of the report. However, reserved land is one of the

important foundations to Singapore success and shall be mentioned.

‘Singapore’s planners have always understood the need to be judicious with

space, to avoid making short sighted mistakes, such as prematurely developing

and ‘using up’ land that should have been reserved for potentially better, future

uses.’ (Bin, 2013)

The area near MRT station or future MRT station is carefully release for

development to assure that the land will help support intended development plan.

Within the site, a 30 storeys condominium is under construction on blank site near

the station, following the densification plan for Bishan (URA, 2013).

Pre-assessment of the target site illustrates that there are both private and

public undeveloped lands on the site. The public owned land should be reserved

and carefully released for future used while the private owned usage should be

regulated to ensure that the development would support Bangkok development

plan. This would hopefully reserve land for future integrated plan that privilege

public transport. The detail assessment is in the table below.

• Ensure that land

development is according

to the plan, spatially and

temporally (URA, 2014).

• For future generation to

meet their needs (URA,

2012).

RESERVED LAND

LON

G-T

ERM

PLA

NN

ING

• There are a few undeveloped land within the site. Some of

them are private owned but some belong to SRT.

• Undeveloped land in high density area could be found around

Bangkok. Some owners prefer to keep them to gain capital

interest as the tax for keeping land undeveloped is very low

(Nims, 1963).

• The current land use for the area is ‘high density residential’,

‘commercial’ and ‘governmental’. However, the zoning

regulation is very broad, high density residential, which is the

majority of the site, allow almost all developments except

industrial (APPENDIX C).

Reserve the land for future used and regulate land

use for undeveloped land.

PLU

SM

INU

S

STRATEGIES INITIATIVES INTENTIONS PRE-ASSESSMENT MAJOR IMPLEMENTATION

69

The initiative can be implemented on site through ensuring that the future use

of undeveloped land will be revaluated and enforced through regulation to assure

they support the overall development plan.

However, Bangkok does not reserved land for future development which is part

of the explanation for today automobile dependency problem (Gibson, 2011). The

reserved land for future development ensures that Mochit would follow Bangkok

development plan. Therefore, the current vague land used plan may also need to

be more specific in order to effectively control the future private development.

The detail of this reflection can be found in the table below.

• The reserved land will ensure that Bangkok has spare land for

its future needs while regulates land use will ensure that the

development will support Bangkok plan.

• However, the current land use are relatively broad. They may

need to be more specific to be more effective in controlling

the development.

As mentioned by Bin, ‘If space of key projects and infrastructure

such as MRT lines and stations is not identified and safeguarded from

development ahead of time, it would be very difficult to overcome

the obstacles of construction the infrastructure in an already built

up area in the future’ (2013), from the research we also found that

the safeguard of land should not only be for the transit station but

also for the necessary activities and accessibility to support the

public transport station itself. However, most of Bangkok land are

now privately owned and therefore can no longer be reserved for

further used like Singapore Instead, regulating future used can be

effective to control developments. The control of land use itself

may not directly support automobile independency, but be a good

foundation to increase accessibility to public transport and reduce

convenience of motor vehicles.

PLU

SM

INU

S

RESERVED LAND

• Ensure that land

development is according

to the plan, spatially and

temporally (URA, 2014).

• For future generation to

meet their needs (URA,

2012).

INITIATIVES INTENTIONS IMPLEMENTATION REFLECTIONS CONCLUSION