City river plan ‘risks heritage’
Creating public spaces for Bangkok residents and visitors should not come at the cost of destroying local communities and their cultural heritage, academics told a panel held at Silpakorn University on Saturday.
Scholars raised concerns about a government plan to erect the so-called “New Landmark of Thailand”, a 7km riverside promenade on both sides of the Chao Phraya River, between Rama VII and Pinklao bridges.
The proposal, overseen by the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration, will have disastrous impacts on the livelihoods and cultural landscape of local communities, said anthropologist Srisakra Vallibhotama.
If the project goes through, residents will find themselves forced out of areas they have inhabited for at least three generations.
The process may be gradual, but its impacts will be irreversible, he said.
From the city’s inception, Bangkok residents have settled mainly along the riverside and canals, creating a cultural landscape that still can be admired today, Mr Srisakra said.
Houses, markets and temples comprise these neighbourhoods, he said, but their uniqueness stems from the social and family ties which connect residents to another over the years.
Whole communities will become uprooted if forced to leave these areas, as they will be scattered in different parts of the capital and end up in individual apartment units.
Beautiful structures may be left for visitors to admire along the riverside, but there will be no more life.
These neighbourhoods will become empty shells, until they are replaced by modern, uniform buildings, he said.
“Who will take responsibility for the destruction of communities and the river’s cultural landscape?” asked Mr Srisakra.
He added the promenade project, imposed on residents, also violates their community rights. Locals must have a say when their family heritage and livelihoods are at stake, he argued.
Pradech Phayakvichien, chairman of the Thailand Urban Designers Association, said the project stemmed from good intentions to provide Bangkok residents with a public space which they can enjoy.
However, it failed to encompass cultural elements as well as residents’ rights and needs, he said. The architect also slammed the lack of public participation in the decision-making process for the promenade.
When asked who will benefit from the riverside promenade, the government keeps answering “the people”, Mr Pradech said.
“Aren’t residents part of the people as well?” he asked, saying they would suffer only negative consequences from the poorly-planned project.
The government should hold three-party talks between the state, private sector and the people to reach a design that would serve the interests of all, he said.