Organization: Central Michigan University
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.seasia-l
Date:         Sun, 24 Jan 1993 17:05:25 EST
From:         Elliott Parker <3ZLUFUR@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU>
Subject:      TH: BKK: A new city?

=======================  Forwarded  Message  ===========================
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 22:12:33+0700
From: Kamol Hengkietisak <kamol@ipied.tu.ac.th>
Subject: Bangkok Post Jan 24: A new city -- Will it work?


Relocation of the Thai capital had been contemplated more than
once in the past. Now the need is more acute than ever with
worsening traffic conditions and pollution problems aggravated by
overpopulation. The Interior Ministry has now, once again,
proposed to relocate government agencies out of Bangkok. All agree
the timing is right, but not all agree with the thrust of the
plan. SOMBAT RAKSAKUL and KRISSANA PARNSOONTHORN report.

BUILDING a new city may be easy, but the real challenge lies in
how to make it work. The Interior Ministry has drafted a plan to
relocate Bangkok-based government offices to a new city, the site
for which has not been decided yet. The plan is now awaiting
approval from the Cabinet.

The ministry is hoping that the private sector will follow suit
and contribute to the prosperity of the new city.

However, experts warn that moving the offices may be a simple
thing to do, but attracting financial support for the new site may
not be easy.

Most city planners are concerned that the project, if left in the
hands of Interior officials, may eventually die a quiet death
"without really achieving any goals".

They point out that Bangkok's traffic congestion and overcrowding
problems are, in fact, a result of poor planning and lack of
control on development.

They claim that the bureaucrats mainly focus on the technical
aspects of the problems and seek short-term solutions. The
government needs systematic and long-term policies to these
issues, they stress.

The city planners say that instead of tackling the root cause of
an existing problem, the bureaucrats come up with new projects.

Building a new city would be like moving old problems to a new
place, said Dr Apichat Wongkaew, president of the Thai City
Planner Society.

A new city goes against the nature of a "living city", he adds.

Like a tree planted on a vast plain, the new city will soon wilt
and die because the private sector will not follow suit as
expected, he warns.

The so-called satellite towns in some European countries such as
England, Scotland and Sweden became "dead cities" because very few
people lived there, said Dr Apichat who has studied sattelite
towns for many years.

A new city is also vulnerable to problems such as crime and social
malaise.

Without economic development and diversity of activities and
culture, residents will have no incentive to live in a new city,
Dr Apichat says.

"A city needs key elements for its survival such as natural
resources, culture, and a transportation system linking it to the
capital," he says.

The government must also pay attention to the quality of life. It
should watch the development process closely, in particular, the
economic, social and environmental factors, he adds.

According to Manop Bhongsadhat, a lecturer in architecture at
Chulalongkorn University, a "living city" based on a British
principle on city-planning, should have at least a million people,
failing which culture will not take root. If the population is
larger, the city will become overcrowded, he says.

However, Town and Country Planning director-ge e[X  Charatsri
Teepirach wants a new city that can accommodate about 100,000
people.

"The relocation of government agencies will be carried out
gradually, step-by-step," she says.

This means, says Dr Apichat, the satellite town will be "dependent
on the capital.

"Thus the government will fail to ease traffic congestion and
overcrowding in the capital," he warns.

Because a dependent satellite town will not be very far from the
capital, "as a matter of necessity, residents will still be able
to travel from their homes to their places of work," he says.

"Some families may even buy more vehicles because the members' may
be working at places far away from each other."

Not only that, people engaged in businesses with the government
agencies will also suffer as a result of the relocation, Dr
Apichat adds.

As for overcrowding, Decha Boonkham, president of the Thai
Association of Landscape Architects, predicted that by year 2000,
Thailand will have a population of about 70 million, 60 per cent
(or 42 million) of which will live in urban areas.

Bangkok's population will double and, as a result, traffic and
overcrowding will worsen.

The only way to solve the traffic problem, he says, is to stop
people from making too many trips.

"To achieve this goal, the government must build a self-contained
city at least 100 kilometres away from Bangkok. The convenience of
life in a new city with little traffic congestion and the distance
will discourage people from commuting between Bangkok and their
new work places," Mr Decha says.

On decentralisation of development away from Bangkok, city
planners generally agree that the new-city concept will accomplish
the objective.

Apart from building the new city, they suggest that the government
should begin solving the city planning problem in Bangkok
seriously. Monstrous cities like Bangkok, city planners point out,
are products of poor planning and lack of control.

Housing projects and commercial complexes are growing in Bangkok
without control and the unending construction has resulted in
serious pollution and water shortage problems, they observe.

Architects only concentrate on how to beautify their designs, Dr
Apichat says, while real estate developers are only worried about
completing their projects. They do not take into consideration the
adverse affects of their projects," Dr Apichat says.

The serious water-shortage problem caused by national projects
such as the Eastern Seaboard is an example of the lack of
systematic planning.

"Just one problem of water shortage alone is enough to kill the
Eastern Seaboard project," he points out.

He blames political interests of the people involved as the cause
of poor planning.

Certain politicians pushed the project with no concern for the
environment and water resources, Dr Apichat says, "because they
owned land in Chon Buri and Rayong provinces and its value
increased because of the project".

Dr Apichat also expressed his concern over lack of direction and
control on real estate development in the private sector.

"No one seems to be aware of the after effect of big projects such
as the `Maung Thong Thani' housing project. It is huge, and will
consume a large quantity of water, estimated to be about one fifth
or one sixth the whole of Bangkok consumption. What do you think
will happen to Bangkok's water situation in the future?," he asks.

A government official, who graduated with a masters' degree in
town planning from the United States, also expressed concern over
the relocation plan.

"Failure of such a huge project can bankrupt the government as it
did in Brazil," he says.

To relieve overcrowding in its eastern seaboard cities and to
realise its "dynamic march to the west policy", the  Brazilian
government invests huge sum of money into building the new city of
Brasilia. Big businesses failed to follow. Brasilia is now a "dead
city", and the government which suffered heavy loses, has been
unable to pay debts, the high-ranking official explains.

"Government officials are basically low-income people. And only
small businesses such as food shops and vendors, may decide to
move to the new city.  These are again low-income people," he
says.

Finally, the city will die its own death because a mix of people
from different income groups is necessary for the survival of any
town," the official says.

A "government city" may not also lure people from Bangkok because
it will not have enough jobs to offer, he notes.

An industrial city might offer more jobs than "a government city",
he says, adding that if the Government wants to build a city like
Washington DC in the United States, Bangkok's old city of
Rattanakosin Island would be the ideal site.

Deputy Interior Minister Chamni Sakdiset, who oversees the
Department of Town and Country Planning, backed the new-city
proposal and said, it will help solve Bangkok's traffic problem.

"The relocation of government agencies will be a leading flag to
persuade other sectors to follow," he said.

A high-ranking official, however, claimed that businesses in the
area wanted to move out because their growth had been restricted
by current regulations.

Chulalongkorn's architectural lecturer Manop said a new city must
have a major activity as an attraction. The city of Nevada in the
middle of a desert, for example, has casinos as its main
attraction, he said.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU