This week the country's leading architects will meet to ask Airports of Thailand (AOT) to cease its reactionary approach to the problems at Suvarnabhumi's passenger terminal.

They point out fundamental errors in design and space management. Without an independent and comprehensive reassessment, they feel, Thailand is unlikely to get the world-class airport it was promised.

"Thais wake up to one piece of bad news after another about the airport every morning," said Sinn Phonghanyudh, president of the Association of Siamese Architects. "The image is so dreadful that many feel more terrified about going to Suvarnabhumi than about flying itself. Putting in a few more toilets or patching up cracks in the floor tiles is not going to help.

"We need to take a holistic approach before coming up with a solution. The AOT has to make people believe it knows exactly what it is doing instead of just responding to day-to-day complaints," Sinn added.

The association's draft report outlines scores of issues, from the lack of sufficient toilet facilities and appropriate signage to unusable revolving doors, inappropriate plumbing fixtures, lack of employee rest areas, blocked emergency exits, poor climate-control design and overall maintenance challenges.

If it were just a handful of mechanical teething problems, these could easily be tackled, said Sinn. Instead they represent a complete disregard for basic planning and design.

"What's the point of promoting the world's largest [single] terminal if the space is so badly managed that it becomes inconvenient and even unsafe for passengers and workers?" he said. "Passages to the gates have been encroached on by shops, art and other things. In a fire, every little object impedes escape."

He said many architects were disappointed in the overall visual appearance. Instead of complementing the open-air feel intended, there is a clutter of pot plants, random signs, maintenance carts, kiosks and artwork.

In December, an AOT committee headed by board member Yodyiem Theptharanont reported on problems faced by passengers and workers, but Sinn said its approach was still based on individual problems.

Even simple ones like clusters of confusing signs persist despite deadlines for fixing them by last month.

A globetrotting UN official who has used Suvarnabhumi many times told The Nation he was disappointed that it did not live up to government promotion despite many successful new Asian airports to learn from.

"It's dirty and looks like construction hasn't finished, duty-free shop take up too much space, and there aren't enough seats to sit on or enough light to read a paper," he said.

Sinn also pointed out that choices of material like the structural steel used to hold up the roof were decades old from an international design standpoint, as much lighter and more attractive ones have been around for years.

"It only reinforces the perception that we don't have the creative and engineering expertise for contemporary design," he said.

Ten years ago, their association's "Warning: Nong Ngu Hao [Suvarnabhumi] Terminal Design" highlighted many of the problems.

It pointed out that glass and canvas were inappropriate for a tropical climate. Roof leaks, heat and too much light in some areas testify that the warning was ignored.

It said maintenance "will be extensive and difficult. Dust mixing with sticky engine-oil particles from planes in the air will be visible all over the glass walls. Instead of fixing the design, the designer proposed expensive and complicated cleaning equipment."

This appears not to have been installed or utilised, to judge by the dust on the glass walls and facilities. Some areas are virtually inaccessible. As a result the grime is more visible every day.

"I don't know what equipment we have, but we've yet to be asked to clean the inside walls," said a janitor.

The draft report will serve as the basis for an association seminar on Friday with the engineers and builders, the results of which will be presented as final recommendations to the AOT next week.

Sinn stresses that while the association is committed to helping in any way to resolve the problems once and for all, neither he nor the association wishes to play a leadership role.

"Eighty per cent of architects in Thailand have been involved in one way or another with this gigantic project," Sinn said. "There is too much behind-the-scenes history that would impede our ability do the job independently. We need professionals from abroad. The money will be well spent. Suvarnabhumi needs the confidence of the international community, so get internationally accepted professionals to do the job."

Nantiya Tangwisutijit

The Nation