• 
• 

Published on September 8, 2007

The Association of Siamese Architects (ASA), the governing body of architects in Thailand, is taking the initiative to make life a little easier for long-suffering Bangkok residents by putting its professional know-how and expertise at the disposal of public policy makers. The ASA said its members - more than 16,000 registered architects - have been asked to put their heads together to come up with a set of pragmatic recommendations to remove some of the capital city's worst eyesores. They will also strive to beautify some neighbourhoods.

The idea is to promote public awareness about the importance of architecture as a driving force for social and economic development. It will also offer Bangkok's leaders new policy options and practical advice on how to improve the quality of life for the more than 10 million residents of this 225-year-old metropolis.

The ASA's initiative has not come a moment too soon. Bangkok is already polluted and overcrowded, and it is fast becoming a depressing city despite the constant efforts to upgrade its infrastructure. Indeed, the ASA and its members must share some of the blame for the proliferation of ugly, unhealthy buildings that do more harm than just offend aesthetic sensibilities. All buildings - including the ugliest ones and those constructed in violation of regulations - come into being with the help of architects and designers.

Unscrupulous building owners and developers often want to skimp on costs related to environmental and social standards. In violation of the law, they hire architects who are prepared to bend their professional ethics. Most of the time, these people manage to stay beyond the reach of the law, and the ASA - which is supposed to uphold standards among its members - is too weak to take action.

Once completed, substandard buildings contribute to a plethora of urban problems ranging from already bad traffic jams to increasing air pollution. In addition they create an unsafe environment to live and work in. Together, these buildings have created the nightmarish concrete jungle that Bangkok has become. One is tempted to say that it is way too late to do anything about this dysfunctional anthill, except perhaps to move the capital city elsewhere.

But that would be too pessimistic an outlook. With some well-thought-out and innovative plans, Bangkok still has much room for improvement and refinement. And the ASA, which is well aware of both its own internal problems and the problems facing society at large, should be given encouragement in its effort to help reverse some of the damage done.

It is welcome news that the ASA wants to start pilot projects in some Bangkok neighbourhoods, of manageable size, in order to demonstrate to the public what tangible and positive changes can be achieved if architects are given more say in policy making at the BMA. Hopefully the private sector and civil society will cooperate with the ASA on how to improve conditions in Bangkok. Cooperation will ensure a greater chance of success, and the completed projects could be held up as case studies to help educate corporations, non-governmental organisations and individual residents about how they can contribute to improving the quality of life in their areas.

Some of the practical steps include: reclaiming footpaths for pedestrians from hawkers who have, for too long, been allowed to occupy those spaces; putting electricity and telephone lines underground; strictly regulating advertising signs; and giving more emphasis to landscaping and planting more trees along sidewalks. These simple steps will be a start in creating conditions that are more welcoming to pedestrians. All this is very well and good, but there must be assurances that these pilot projects - which will be small in scale - are given every chance of success. Still, the question remains about the will of the politicians who run the Bangkok city government to not only push through these experimental projects but to widen them to other Bangkok suburbs that are badly in need of improvement.         

That leads us to the questions that usually induce exasperation: how to persuade the BMA - which has time and again proven too timid to enforce its own city planning and zoning regulations - to crack down on roadside vendors and to begin to perform its duty without fear or favour. It will take nothing short of a leap of faith. But then Bangkok residents don't seem to have any other choice.