THEORIES OF ARCHITECTURE AND URBANISM

ARC 61303/ARC 2224

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ESSAY

WESTERN AVE, SEATTLE & PETALING STREET, KUALA LUMPUR

CHEN EE DONG

0321181

TUTOR: MR LAM SHEN FEI (2-4PM)

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 Introduction

2.0 Comparative analysis

3.0 References

2

1.1 INTRODUCTION TO PROJECT

This project calls for a thorough comparative analysis between the findings from Part 1

case study (Western Ave, Seattle) and local site research (Jalan Petaling, Kuala Lumpur).

The key analysis factor lies in determining the similarities and dissimilarities based on the

patterns of social activities, types of contact points and the varying degrees of contact

intensity between the two cities.

3

Introduction

Behavior is influenced by the built environment. To what extent this is exhibited in

Western Ave and Petaling Street? Through a comparative analysis, a comparison is drawn

between the two sites with regards to social patterns, type of activities and the

identification of contact points and contact intensity to explore the similarities and

dissimilarities with the implementation of Jan Gehl’s theories in the urban environment of

two cities on different ends of the world.

Western Ave in Seattle is the case study explored in Part 1 of the project. With

Seattle being an oceanic, Western Ave is a primary street which borders the shoreline in

downtown Seattle. Jalan Petaling is a street located at the heart of Kuala Lumpur and is

better known as Petaling Street or the Chinatown of the city. The site is particularly alluring

for its traditional Chinese culture and its heritage values within an urban context, and it is a

vicinity well-known for its street food, retail and market activity, particularly at its main

Chinatown market counterpart. Activities and attractions within the site are notable

contact points with varying degrees of contact intensity supported by locals and visitors.

Jalan Petaling is the local site research and will serve as the primary site for comparison

against Western Ave, Seattle.

The boundary for research is extended to cover the radius of two adjacent streets

from the main streets of Western Ave and Petaling Street. As seen in Figure 1 and Figure 2

below, the boundary of research for Western Ave covers the area bounded from the

shoreline to 2nd Avenue and the boundary of research for Petaling Street covers the whole

stretch of Jalan Petaling and secondary streets branching out from Jalan Sultan.

4

Figure 1: Western Ave, Seattle

Figure 2: Petaling Street, Kuala Lumpur

Urban forms and social patterns

In regards to urban form, Western Ave has a grid-like urban form due to its axial

and formalized arrangement of building blocks. Evident from the massing, the building

blocks are bounded by avenues and secondary streets which are eventually connected to

Western Ave. On the contrary, the urban form of Petaling Street consists of a deformed

grid. As observed from the figure ground diagram, the building footprint does not follow a

definite rectilinear grid arrangement, although there is slight evidence of linear geometry

as the site is still defined by main paths like Jalan Petaling, Jalan Sultan, Jalan Tun HS Lee,

etc. Thus, a serial vision may reveal the linearity in movement patterns for Western Ave,

whereas a more meandering approach is applicable to the deformed grid of Petaling Street.

5

Figure 3: Buildings in Western Ave have no setback.

Figure 4: The five-foot way in Petaling Street, an indentation and setback into the building.

A notable dissimilarity between the two cities would be the difference in built form.

Buildings located in Western Ave are predominantly masonry units with the lack of a

setback. On the contrary, buildings in Petaling Street are designed with a sidewalk and

setback feature called the five-foot way. The five-foot way, indented into the ground floor of

the building, provides a shaded pedestrian walkway. Granted, both walkways are primary

forms of circulation and are equally conducive for passive contact, however, two notable

difference are identified. First, crowds have a higher likelihood to gather under the five-

foot ways of Petaling Street than the unshaded sidewalks of Western Ave; second, without

the five-foot way, pedestrians of Western Ave have more visual continuity than pedestrians

of Petaling Street whose field of vision may be obstructed by the overhead structure

6

(illustrated in Figure 5), hence the method of crowd engagement between the two cities is

evidently different. These points will be explained below.

One of Jan Gehl’s theories discusses the likelihood of outdoor and social activity is

highly correlated to the quality of the outdoor space. The five-foot way of Petaling Street is

the perfect evidence –it provides ample shade and respite from the sun and safety from the

vehicular traffic – resulting to a higher quality space as compared to the open, unshaded

outdoor spaces in Western Ave. Hence, there is a greater tendency for pedestrians to use

and gather in the five-foot way, potentially forming higher intensity contacts instead of the

passive contact common in city streets.

The existence of a setback in built form has a significant impact in the methods of

pedestrian engagement which highly affects the social patterns of the city. In Western Ave,

the visual connection between a pedestrian and the façade is maintained. Hence, engaging

and illustrative facades might serve as an effective attraction. However, this method is not

applicable with the presence of the five-foot way due to the overhead structure.

Pedestrians in Petaling Street rarely look at storefront visuals and façade aesthetics, but

are more attracted to the trade activity occurring on the same street level. Hence, as

observed from the site, merchandise is often sold in an open manner, distorting the

boundaries between public and private realms. This brings about the topic of street level

engagement as practiced in both cities, further iterated upon discussing activities and

contact points below.

Figure 5: The dissimilarities in methods of pedestrian engagement due to the differences in

built form. Storefront façade visuals might not be as effective for five-foot way users as

compared to sidewalk users.

7

Activity, contact points and contact intensity

Figure 6: Contact points in Western Ave, Seattle

Figure 7: Contact points in Petaling Street

8

Contact points, being points of human interaction subjected to varying degrees of

intensity, can be mapped out in both Western Ave and Petaling Street, as illustrated in

Figure 6 and 7 above. Stemmed from a wide spectrum of activities carried out in the city,

the contact points found in the two cities are evidently formed due to different reasons and

activity.

One of Gehl’s theories mentioned that activity is a medium for contact. Without

activity, there is no requirement for people to use and share a space, erasing the need for

contact. Victor Streinbuck Park in Western Ave is a prime example to illustrate this point.

The open green space in the city serves as a platform for various activities and the

development of contact points from mere passive contacts to high quality contacts. The

establishment of high quality contact intensity are also evident in Petaling Street, evident

from the strong community bond. Almost everyone knows everyone in the area as a result

of co-living and working – a result of human activity.

Figure 8: A well designed public space: a platform conducive for necessary, optional and

resultant activities.

Iterated by Gehl, a high quality outdoor space is the key determinant in influencing

the duration of time people spent outdoors, and such is illustrated in contact points of

Western Ave overlooking the ocean or some form of scenic view. Some contact points

happen to be landmarks, a recognizable point of reference which encourage the gathering

of people. The eastern and northern entrances of Petaling Street Market for example, are

high intensity contact points and boosts a high pedestrian volume due to its easily

recognizable element. However, a unique element in Petaling Street would be the existence

of high intensity contact points albeit the thin pedestrian volume in the space, exhibited by

the five-foot way. Being a primary circulatory route for pedestrians, there is a higher

9

tendency to interact with locals who frequent the five-foot way to conduct leisure activities

such as reading and leisure interacting with others.

The most interesting point to note would be the similarities in contact points

between the two sites, as they seem to be predominantly established from the food and

market culture of both cities, with examples of contact points being at an open food joint

(Starbucks, sidewalk cafes, hawkers) or a location in close proximity to the market (open

spaces, curbs, parks). Hence, from this it is inferenced that the overarching similarity

between the two sites is the strong market culture and identity due to the presence of Pike

Place Market in Western Ave and the Petaling Street Market. Pedestrians seem to be more

attracted to places with an established activity and people, which can be supported by

Gehl’s theory of how people are naturally attracted to people and other perceivable human

activity. Evidence from the site sufficiently proves that sidewalk cafes are often more

engaging than enclosed eateries, and a similar situation can be seen in Petaling Street,

where traditional hawker and open eatery stalls are the equivalent of sidewalk cafes

exhibited in Western Ave. These are often high intensity and conducive contact points for

developing closer relationships between people, rather than eateries on the upper floor

levels, highlighting the importance of street level engagement. As Gehl places it, people and

human activity are the greatest object of attention and interest.

Figure 9: Sidewalk cafes (Starbucks) and hawkers are the equivalent of each other as

effective contact points.

Street culture and social patterns

From the previous point, it is evident that the market culture contributes a certain

identity to both cities. Both Western Ave and Petaling Street portray a difference in street

culture between the market precinct and their non-market counterparts. From

observation, there is a higher pedestrian volume in and near Pike Place Market and

Petaling Street Market than the rest of the site, and in their vicinity, pedestrians simply

weave through the traffic, walking and spilling into the roads from the sidewalks that are

accommodated for them just to get to the other side. This interesting social pattern

10

exhibited is unique to the vicinity of Pike Place Market and Petaling Street Market in which

pedestrians exude more dominance on the streets, portraying a stronger claim of the path

than vehicles. Cars are still permissible at Pike Place Market, but in Petaling Street, the

entire street is occupied by street vendors with no access to vehicles after certain hours till

the night.

Figure 10: People not constrained to the sidewalks, but rather, spill on the roads, illustrating dominance over vehicles at Pike Place Market.

Figure 11: By night time, Petaling Street Market completely dominates the road and is inaccessible by vehicles.

Another similar social pattern between the two cities would be the curb culture

unique to the market vicinity of Western Ave and Petaling Street. In Figure X and X,

pedestrians are seen to sit on the curbs and sidewalks of the street to carry out optional

activities like eating and socializing. In both cases, curb culture is developed due to the

unmet demand for public benches and the lack of public space for enjoying eat-as-you-go

street food, as most hawkers do not provide seating arrangements.

Figure 12: Curb culture in Petaling Street (left) and in Western Ave (right)

11

The similarity of social patterns between the two cities is interesting to note as they

stem from the design of public spaces, reinforcing Gehl’s theory regarding the importance

of designing quality outdoor spaces.

In conclusion, Western Ave and Petaling Street reinforces the idea that human

behavior is shaped by the built environment, as social patterns and street culture are

results of the way public spaces are designed. Western Ave and Petaling Street proved to be

conducive sites for a wide range of activities. Necessary, optional and social activities occur

on a daily basis with varying degrees of contact intensity, with most within and bordering

the market precincts in both sites. The most noticeable difference between the two cities

would be the more evident distortion of public-private realms in Petaling Street due to the

spontaneous and organic liveliness of market activity between buildings, illustrating Gehl’s

ideas of public spaces to the point where the market culture of Petaling Street is no longer

secondary and negligible, but rather symbolic and contributes to the identity of the city as a

whole.

12

References

Aiello, G., & Gendelman, I. (2008). Seattle's Pike Place Market (De)constructed: An Analysis of

Tourist Narratives about a Public Space. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 5(3), 158-

185. doi:10.2167/jtcc093.0

Before & After: 30 Photos that Prove the Power of Designing with Pedestrians in Mind. (2015).

Retrieved November 27, 2016, from http://www.archdaily.com/773139/before-and-after-30-

photos-that-prove-the-power-of-designing-with-pedestrians-in-mind

Oberklaid, S. (2015). Observing People in Pike Place, Part 1. Retrieved November 27, 2016,

from https://www.theurbanist.org/2015/10/12/observing-people-in-pike-place-part-1/

Oberklaid, S. (2015). Observing People in Pike Place, Part 2. Retrieved November 27, 2016,

from https://www.theurbanist.org/2015/10/19/observing-people-in-pike-place-part-2/

Sintusingha. S., Polakit. K., & Bruch. R. (2010). Urban Dynamism, a Contrasting Experience:

Street Life in Unplanned Bangkok and Planned Melbourne [Scholarly project].