EVALUATION OF ADAPTIVE RE-USE OF SHOPHOUSES IN GEORGE TOWN WORLD HERITAGE SITE

(1)

EVALUATION OF ADAPTIVE RE-USE OF SHOPHOUSES IN GEORGE TOWN WORLD HERITAGE SITE

TAN CHIN LING

UNIVERSITI SAINS MALAYSIA

2014

(2)

EVALUATION OF ADAPTIVE RE-USE OF SHOPHOUSES IN GEORGE TOWN WORLD HERITAGE SITE

by

TAN CHIN LING

Thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Science (Architecture)

FEBRUARY 2014

(3)

PENILAIAN TERHADAP PENYESUAIGUNAAN SEMULA RUMAH KEDAI DI TAPAK WARISAN DUNIA GEORGE TOWN

oleh

TAN CHIN LING

Tesis yang diserahkan untuk memenuhi keperluan bagi Ijazah Sarjana Sains (Seni Bina)

FEBRUARI 2014

(4)

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First and foremost, I would like to thank my supervisor, Prof. Dr. A. Ghafar bin Ahmad for his undivided support and guidance during the course of this study. I am grateful that he is always patience and provides ideas that help to accomplish my study.

Secondly, I am deeply indebted to Mr. Tan Yeow Wooi in providing the information, photos and architectural drawings for my research. His valuable advice on data interpretation, continuous support and encouragement throughout the study are gratefully acknowledged.

Besides that, he also guided and allowed me to visit to his conservation projects site for better understanding in my study. Thirdly, I greatly appreciate Dr. Gwynn Jenkins and Ms. Ng Hooi Seam for the assistance and help provided during the data collection process in this research.

Furthermore, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my parent for their comforting words and encouragement. Never the least, I would like to thank my lovely wife, Ms.

Lee Ai Pheng for her unconditional love and encouragement. Her continuous support is my greatest motivation in the accomplishment of this study. Thank you again to all of all the above named and those who have not been mentioned for helping me in completing this thesis.

(5)

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Acknowledgement ii

Table of Contents iii

List of Tables viii

List of Figures ix

Abstrak xviii

Abstract xix

CHAPTER 1- INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction 1

1.2 Research Questions 4

1.3 Research Objectives 5

1.4 Research Methodology 5

1.5 Outcomes of Research 6

1.6 Organisation of Research 7

CHAPTER 2- LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction 9

2.2 Adaptive Re-use 9

2.3 Evaluation 15

2.4 Conservation Approaches 16

(6)

iv

2.5 The Historical Background and Local Communities of George Town 20

2.6 Urban Development of George Town 27

2.6.1 Architectural Background of George Town 35 2.6.2 Planning Controls and Building Legislation 38

2.6.3 Street Culture of George Town 39

2.7 International Convention and Charters 41

2.7.1 UNESCO and the World Heritage Convention 41

2.7.2 1877 SPAB Manifesto 42

2.7.3 1931 Athens Charter 43

2.7.4 1964 Venice Charter 43

2.7.5 1999 Burra Charter (Revision) 44

2.8 Cultural and Natural Heritage 45

2.8.1 Cultural Heritage 45

2.8.2 Natural Heritage 45

2.8.3 National Protection and International Protection of the Cultural 45 and Natural Heritage

2.9 UNESCO World Heritage Site of George Town, Penang 48

2.9.1 Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) 49

2.9.2 The Property 51

2.9.3 Classification of Heritage Buildings 53

2.10 Shophouse 55

2.11 Summary 65

CHAPTER 3- RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction 67

3.2 Site and Building Selection 69

(7)

v

3.3 Data Collection 70

3.4 Research Indicators 71

3.5 Measurable Scale 73

3.6 Analytical Approach 74

3.7 Summary 75

CHAPTER 4- CASE STUDY ONE: SHOPHOUSE CONVERTED TO PRIVATE OFFICE

4.1 Introduction 76

4.2 Historical Background of China Street 79

4.3 Roof Profile 82

4.4 Layout/ Space 83

4.5 Material and Colour Scheme 91

4.6 Front Façade Design 93

4.7 Summary 96

CHAPTER 5- CASE STUDY TWO: SHOPHOUSE CONVERTED TO BISTRO, MUSEUM, CHINESE MEDICAL HALL & HOTEL

5.1 Introduction 97

5.2 Roof Profile 98

5.6 Summary 114

(8)

vi

CHAPTER 6- CASE STUDY THREE: SHOPHOUSE CONVERTED TO PRIVATE RESIDENCE

6.1 Introduction 115

6.2 Roof Profile 117

6.6 Summary 126

CHAPTER 7- CASE STUDY FOUR: SHOPHOUSE CONVERTED TO ART GALLERY

7.1 Introduction 127

7.2 Roof Profile 128

7.6 Summary 142

CHAPTER 8- ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

8.1 Introduction 143

8.2 Analysis 143

8.2.1 Roof Profile 143

8.2.2 Layout/ Space 146

8.2.3 Material and Colour Scheme 150

8.2.4 Front Façade Design 154

8.3 Findings 156

(9)

vii

8.4 Summary 165

CHAPTER 9- CONCLUSION

9.1 Research Overview 166

9.2 Research Outcome 166

9.3 Policy Implication 170

9.4 Proposed Guidelines for Adaptive Re- use of Heritage Shophouse 170

9.5 Future Research 183

BIBLIOGRAPHY 185

APPENDIX A: Questionnaire Form APPENDIX B: Old Maps & Plans

(10)

viii

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 2.1 List of shophouse conservation, restoration and adaptive 65 design projects in George Town.

Table 3.1 Categories of Adaptive Re-use Indicators 72

Table 3.2 Likert Scale 74

Table 4.1 Material and Colour Scheme 91

Table 8.1 Survey results on material and colour scheme. 151

Table 8.2 Survey results on front façade design. 154

Table 9.1 Proposed Guidelines for Adaptive Re- use of Heritage Shophouse. 170

(11)

ix

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure 2.1: The turbine hall at the Tate Modern, London, a museum of 12 contemporary art converted from a former power station.

Figure 2.2: The conversion of the Dreher Brewery in Venice, Italy into 13 residential units. Making use of the chimney as the escape

staircase.

Figure 2.3: The fish market in Izmir, Turkey has been converted into a 14 popular waterside retail complex.

Figure 2.4: The old warehouses converted into shops and restaurants at 15 the waterfront in Sydney, Australia.

Figure 2.5: A painting of Penang dated 1837. 23

Figure 2.6: “Insulae Indiae Orientalis”, a mid-17th century Dutch map of 23 Southeast Asia by Jodocus Hondius.

Figure 2.7: A British Map of India and part of Southeast Asia by E. Bowen, 24 1747.

Figure 2.8: Aerial view of George Town in 1960’s. 30

Figure 2.9: Aerial view of George Town in 1990’s. 31

Figure 2.10: Map of George Town 1972. 32

(12)

x

Figure 2.14: Settlement Growth of George Town. 34

Figure 2.15: State Government Entitled 6 Heritage Zonings in 1995. 49

Figure 2.16: The UNESCO World Heritage Site of George Town, Penang. 53

Figure 2.17: Southern Chinese Eclectic Style Shophouse elements. 56

Figure 2.18: Early Penang Style Shophouse. 57

Figure 2.19: Southern Chinese Eclectic Style Shophouse. 58

Figure 2.20: Early Straits Eclectic Style Shophouse. 59

Figure 2.21: Late Straits Eclectic Style Shophouse. 60

Figure 2.22: Art Deco Style Shophouse. 61

Figure 2.23: Early Modernism Style Shophouse. 62

Figure 3.1: Flow Chart of Research Process. 68

Figure 4.1: The front façade of the shophouse before restoration. 77

Figure 4.2: The front façade of the shophouse after restoration. 78

Figure 4.3: The vista of China Street. 81

Figure 4.4: The vista of China Street. 81

Figure 4.5: The V-shaped terracotta roof tiles roofing at first floor rear room. 82

(13)

xi

Figure 4.6: The timber partition panel at ground floor. 83

Figure 4.7: Front hall before restoration. 85

Figure 4.8: Front hall after restoration. 85

Figure 4.9: Air well before restoration. 86

Figure 4.10: Air well after restoration. 86

Figure 4.11: Rear hall. 87

Figure 4.12: First floor air well and toilet before restoration. 89

Figure 4.13: First floor air well and toilet after restoration. 89

Figure 4.14: Front room after restoration. 90

Figure 4.15: Rear room after restoration. 90

Figure 4.16: Upper facade. 93

Figure 4.17: Ground floor façade before restoration. 94

Figure 4.18: Ground floor façade after restoration. 95

Figure 4.19: The five foot way after restoration. 95

Figure 5.1: The building of Yin Oi Tong. 98

Figure 5.2: The roof edge of Yin Oi Tong. 99

Figure 5.3: The internal view of Tang Bistro. 100

(14)

xii

Figure 5.4: The internal view of Tang Bistro. 100

Figure 5.5: The access door at Tang Bistro to the museum at next door. 101

Figure 5.6: The air well at Tang Bistro ground floor. 101

Figure 5.7: The courtyard at the rear part of the shophouse. 102

Figure 5.8: The kitchen which is detached from the front part of the 102 shophouse but linked by courtyard.

Figure 5.9: The museum at the ground floor. 103

Figure 5.10: The staircase access to the hotel rooms at upstairs. 103

Figure 5.11: The hall at ground floor. (private space for hotel) 104

Figure 5.12: The hotel room facing road. 105

Figure 5.13: The hotel room with air well. 105

Figure 5.14: The hotel room facing courtyard. 106

Figure 5.15: The fire staircase at courtyard area. 106

Figure 5.16 The five foot way. 107

Figure 5.17 The cement render floor at Tang Bistro 108

Figure 5.18: The cement tiles flooring at Museum at ground floor. 108

Figure 5.19: Old photo of Yin Oi Tong. 111

Figure 5.20: The ground floor front façade. 112

(15)

xiii

Figure 5.21: The upper floor front façade. 113

Figure 5.22: The five foot way of the corner unit of Yin Oi Tong. 113

Figure 6.1: The front facade of the shophouse before restoration. 116

Figure 6.2: The front facade of the shophouse after restoration. 117

Figure 6.3: The front hall or living room at ground floor. 118

Figure 6.4: The kitchen beside the air well. 119

Figure 6.5: Front hall before restoration. 119

Figure 6.6: Front hall after restoration. 119

Figure 6.7: First floor rear part before restoration. 121

Figure 6.8: First floor rear part after restoration. 121

Figure 6.9: The upper floor front facade after restoration. 125

Figure 7.1: Front view of the building. 128

Figure 7.2: Gable end with Chinese cultural symbol. 129

Figure 7.3: Transparent glass panel separate the internal and the external 130 of the building.

Figure 7.4: Main hall at ground floor. 130

Figure 7.5: Air well at ground floor. 131

(16)

xiv

Figure 7.6: Air well at ground floor. 131

Figure 7.7: Timber staircase at air well. 132

Figure 7.8: Air well with transparent polycarbonate roofing. 133

Figure 7.9: Exhibition hall at first floor. 133

Figure 7.10: Air well with timber shutter panel window at first floor. 134

Figure 7.11: Terrace at the rear part of first floor. 134

Figure 7.12: Terra cotta V- shaped roof tiles roofing at terrace. 135

Figure 7.13: The photo shows the contemporary awning at the front verandah. 140

Figure 7.14: Terra cotta tiles flooring and granite steps at five foot way. 141

Figure 7.15: The air conditioning compressors are located inside the five foot 141 way to prevent any visual intervention towards the front façade of the building.

Figure 8.1: Pie chart of roof profile conservation in adaptive re- use of 145

shophouse.

Figure 8.2: Alteration in roof level and material. 146

Figure 8.3: Pie chart of alteration in layout/ space (air well) in adaptive 147 re- use of shophouse.

Figure 8.4: Pie chart of alteration in layout/ space (five foot way) in 148 adaptive re- use of shophouse.

(17)

xv

Figure 8.5: Air well was converted to swimming pool. 148

Figure 8.6: Air well was covered with new roof for new function as art gallery. 149

Figure 8.7: Pie chart of alteration in structure such as column, beam and 150 load bearing wall in adaptive re- use of shophouse.

Figure 8.8: Restoration of shophouse using original material. 152

Figure 8.9: Restoration of shophouse using lime plaster. 152

Figure 8.10: Restoration of shophouse using original material. 153

Figure 8.11: No.116 Armenian Street. 155

Figure 8.12: No. 81 & 83 China Street. 155

Figure 8.13: No.26, Church Street. 155

Figure 8.14: No.47, Muntri Street. 155

Figure 8.15: No 54, Muntri Street. 156

Figure 8.16: No.118 Armenian Street, Mutiara Gallery. 156

Figure 8.17: Workers are not familiar with traditional roof tile’s laying method. 159

Figure 8.18: Lack of skillful artisan and worker. 159

Figure 8.19: Time needs to produce quality timber work. 159

Figure 8.20: Limitation in acquiring traditional material such as terracotta floor 160 tiles.

(18)

xvi

Figure 8.21: Lime wash painting require excessive time. 160

Figure 8.22: Laying granite blocks require excessive time. 160

Figure 8.23: The front façade replaced by modern window and elements. 162

Figure 8.24: Alteration from 2 storey to 3 storey. 162

Figure 8.25: Transformed to swiftlets house. 163

Figure 9.1: Southern Chinese Eclectic Style shophouse elements. 183

(19)

xvii

LIST OF DRAWINGS

Page

Drawing 4.1: Ground Floor Plan 84

Drawing 4.2: First Floor Plan 88

Drawing 6.1 Ground Floor Plan (After Restoration) 120

Drawing 6.2 First Floor Plan (After Restoration) 122

Drawing 7.1: Ground Floor Plan 136

Drawing 7.2: First Floor Plan 137

(20)

xviii

PENILAIAN TERHADAP PENYESUAIGUNAAN SEMULA RUMAH KEDAI WARISAN DI TAPAK WARISAN DUNIA GEORGE TOWN

ABSTRAK

Kebanyakan rumah kedai warisan di George Town telah diubah dan ditambah dari semasa ke semasa, ia menggabungkan rekabentuk dari tempoh yang berbeza dan menggunakan bahan binaan yang mungkin diambil dari bangunan yang dibina lebih awal.

Rumah kedai warisan adalah jejak fizikal zaman dahulu. Walau bagaimanapun, fungsi asal bangunan lama biasanya akan diubah. Penyesuaigunaan semula merupakan proses menyesuaiguna semula bangunan untuk fungsi yang baru tetapi mengekalkan ciri- ciri bersejarah dan struktur utamanya. Sebagaimana yang diketahui, majoriti bangunan warisan di George Town merupakan rumah kedai. Biasanya pengguna baru rumah kedai akan membuat perubahan untuk menampung fungsi atau aktiviti baru. Oleh itu, objektif kajian ini adalah untuk mengkaji dan menentukan ciri- ciri rumah kedai di Tapak Warisan Dunia George Town berdasarkan nilai keunggulan sejagat, mengenalpasti perubahan dalam rekabentuk rumah kedai akibat penyesuaigunaan semula dan menilai penyesuaigunaan semula rumah kedai di Tapak Warisan Dunia George Town berdasarkan profil bumbung, susun atur/ ruang, bahan &

skim warna dan rekabentuk fasad hadapan. Metodologi kajian adalah termasuk kajian literatur, pengumpulan data, analisis data dan kesimpulan hasil penyelidikan. Melalui kajian literatur, maklumat yang berkaitan dengan penyesuaigunaan semula dalam bahan-bahan yang diterbitkan, dokumen, artikel, keratan akhbar, kertas penyelidikan dan lain-lain telah dikaji. Data utama adalah dikumpul melalui kajian di rumah kedai warisan yang sudah disesuaiguna semula untuk fungsi baru. Hasil kajian memberi kefahaman tentang penyesuaigunaan semula rumah kedai di George Town WHS, terutamanya impak terhadap nilai seni bina dan kepentingan budaya.

(21)

xix

EVALUATION OF ADAPTIVE RE- USE OF SHOPHOUSES IN GEORGE TOWN WORLD HERITAGE SITE

ABSTRACT

Most of the heritage shophouses in George Town are adapted and added to over time, incorporating layers from different periods and utilizing building materials that may have been taken from other earlier buildings. The heritage shophouses are living on as physical traces of the distant past. However, old buildings often outlive their original purposes. Adaptive re-use is a process that adapts old buildings for new uses while retaining their historic features and main structures. As we know, majority of heritage buildings in George Town are shophouses.

Normally the new user of shophouse will make changes to accommodate new use or activities.

Hence, the objectives of this research are to study and determine the characteristics of shophouses in George Town World Heritage Site based on the Outstanding Universal Value, to identify the alterations in shophouse’s design due to adaptive re- use and evaluate the adaptive re-use of shophouses in George Town World Heritage Site based on its roof profile, layout/

space, material & colour scheme and front façade design. The research methodology is included literature review, data collection, data analysis and conclusion of research finding.

Through literature review, information related to adaptive re- use in published materials, documents, articles, newspaper cuttings, research paper and etc. were studied. The primary data were collected from field survey of heritage shophouses which already adaptive re- used for new function. The research outcome provides an understanding of adaptive re- use of shophouses in George Town WHS, especially the impact towards the architectural value and cultural significance.

(22)

1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

Most of the buildings in George Town are adapted and added to over time, incorporating layers from different periods and utilizing building materials that may have been taken from other earlier buildings. Hence, history is an inseparable part of the environment. The heritage buildings are living on as physical traces of the distant past.

However, old buildings often outlive their original purposes. This is called “adaptive re- use approach” in building conservation. Adaptive re-use is a process that adapts buildings for new uses while retaining their historic features and main structures. It conserves heritage buildings by changing outdated functions into new uses to meet contemporary demand. For example, an old shophouse may become a museum or art gallery. A rundown church may find new life as a restaurant, such as St. Joseph Training College (Gurney Paragon) at Persiaran Gurney, George Town, Penang. Adaptive re- use can assist the building in order to regain or redefine its contemporary economic value. Regaining economic value for the heritage buildings will be a good reason in convincing the decision- makers to conserve the heritage building properly. The new economic activities can provide income to cover the restoration and maintenance cost.

Apart from that, adaptive re- use of heritage building also promotes conservation of the environment. This is due to the natural resources such as building materials are not exploited as there are less or no requirements for new construction.

However, there are at least two types of historic buildings which are not suitable for adaptive re-use to prolong their life. One of these is religious buildings or category I

(23)

2

buildings such as temples and mosques, especially those located in a long established town where the religious building already classified as one of the most significant local monuments. For example, Kuan Yin Temple and Masjid Kapitan Keling at Jalan Masjid Kapitan Keling, George Town, Penang. It retains its function as a religious place and a symbolic venue for traditional ceremonies or festivals. Besides that, another type of building which is not suitable for adaptive re-use is the buildings that require high authentic value. This type of building requires additional consideration in material, workmanship, and design. Moreover, nowadays, authenticity in the socio- cultural context has become an important consideration in George Town World Heritage Site. In this case, new use in adaptive re-use approach may require physical alterations that will affect the authenticity of the building.

Since George Town have been recognized by UNESCO World Heritage Convention as UNESCO World Heritage Site (WHS) after evaluated by the World Heritage Committee on 7^th July 2008 under category of cultural heritage, criterion II, III and IV, there are a lots local and foreign investors begin to convert the existing heritage buildings in George Town World Heritage Site for commercial use. For example, some of the shophouses were converted into modern cafe, museum and office. However, there are no clear and comprehensive guidelines for adaptive re-use in George Town.

Recently, the Penang State Government is drafting the Special Area Plan (SAP) for George Town World Heritage Site. It will be good if this Special Area Plan can state clearly the categories of commercial activities which are allowed in World Heritage Site and which are not as it may give impact on the way of life of residents as well as visitors.

The historic city of George Town has 2344 units of buildings in the core zone, while 2321 units of buildings in the buffer zone. Majority of these heritage buildings are

(24)

3

shophouses. Shophouse is an urban terrace house of Asian towns from eighteenth to twentieth century. The shophouse may be used as dwelling quarters or more commonly incorporates a shop or business premise on the ground floor while the family resides on the top floor, providing both convenience and security.

Penang is the state in Malaysia that conserved the most number of shophouses in Southeast Asia. In George Town, the capital city founded in 1786 by Francis Light concentrated around 7000 shophouses built in early 19^th century to late 1970s.

Shophouses in Penang are normally narrow in frontage but long and interval with internal air wells. They are built in a row with shared party wall, facing street front with a verandah way called five-foot way. Shophouse are built in rows and these rows are arranged blocks within a grid of roads and back lanes. Each row is fronted by a continuous five foot way while each house shares “party” wall with its neighbour. A shophouse is usually two or three storey high, long and narrow. Special features of shophouse are mountain-like pitch roof with variety of gable end and internal air wells.

The attractive façade is made up of a door flanked by windows on either side on the ground floor and shuttered windows upstairs.

There are five basic styles of shophouses named as “Early Penang Style”,

“Southern Chinese” Eclectic Style, “Strait” Eclectic Style, Art-Deco Style and Early Modern Style. Each style reflects the social-economic and cultural background as well as building technology influences the particular period. The original material, air well, openings, and panels help natural ventilation and cooling. Currently, shophouse is categorized as Category II heritage building where adaptive re- use approach is allowed.

Hence, if shophouse in Penang are properly adaptive re- used, maintained and cared for, it will continue to be functional and live-able.

(25)

4

Since year 2008, adaptive re-use has become one of the common approaches used in heritage shophouse conservation in George Town, Penang. It is the process of adapting old structures for purposes other than those initially intended. Most of the heritage buildings will change their use through their lifetime and this will invariably necessitate changes to the internal layout and fabric of the building. Normally the new user of the building will make some changes to a building to accommodate a new use or activities. However, the appropriateness of the new use to the building fabric and its integrity does need to be considered. Besides the economic value, it is important to conserve the historic value of the building as well.

Hence, in this research, “Evaluation of Adaptive Re-use of Shophouses in George Town World Heritage Site”, the adaptive re-use of shophouses practiced in George Town area is evaluated with a series of indicators. By the end of this research, the adaptive re-use of the heritage shophouses practiced in George Town are evaluated and summarized as research finding.

1.2 Research Questions

The research questions for this study mainly focus on the areas stated below:

I. There are many shophouses in George Town World Heritage Site adaptive re- used for new functions, did it safeguard the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of George Town World Heritage Site?

II. What are the impacts of adaptive re- use towards roof profile of shophouses in George Town?

III. What are the impacts of adaptive re- use towards layout and space in shophouses in George Town?

(26)

5

IV. What are the impacts of adaptive re- use towards building material and colour scheme of shophouses in George Town?

V. What are the impacts of adaptive re- use towards front façade design of shophouses in George Town?

1.3 Research Objectives

Although George Town and Malacca have been recognized by UNESCO World Heritage Convention as UNESCO World Heritage Site after evaluated by the World Heritage Committee on 7^th July 2008, there are still lack of researches or studies on George Town World Heritage Site, especially the research on adaptive re-use of shophouses in George Town. Hence, the objectives of this study are as below:

I. To study and determine the characteristics of shophouses in George Town World Heritage Site based on the Outstanding Universal Value.

II. To identify the alterations in shophouse’s design due to adaptive re- use in George Town World Heritage Site.

III. To evaluate the adaptive re-use of shophouses in George Town World Heritage Site based on Its roof profile, layout/ space, material & colour scheme and front façade design.

1.4 Research Methodology

I. Study and understanding the heritage shophouses in George Town according to the original identity of the area or the street.

II. Study and analyzing the old building plans and historical documents.

(27)

6

III. Understanding the original space usage in heritage shophouse.

IV. Identify and study the adaptive re- use projects in George Town World Heritage Site.

V. Evaluation and observations through site survey where data is obtained from a visual inspection, adaptive re-use restoration project site visit and photographing.

VI. Interview the building owner or occupants and building conservation specialists such as heritage conservation architects, conservators, heritage conservation contractors and the city council officers.

VII. Questionnaires, where data is collected by evaluate the adaptive re- use projects in George Town World Heritage Site based on a series of structured questions.

VIII. Summarize and analyze the data collected accordingly to the research objectives to obtain findings.

1.5 Outcomes of Research

In this research, adaptive re-use of shophouses in George Town World Heritage Site will be evaluated based on a series of indicators. The following outcomes can be highlighted from this research:

I. This research is expected to give a contribution in providing data in understanding the practices of adaptive re- use of shophouse in George Town World Heritage Site and its impacts toward Outstanding Universal Value.

II. The research findings benefits the policy maker, urban planners, architects, building conservators in future shophouse conservation works by showing impacts of adaptive re- use of shophouse in George Town World Heritage Site toward Outstanding Universal Value.

(28)

7 1.6 Organisation of Research

The research is organised and divided into six chapters as below:

I. Chapter One: Introduction

It elaborates research background and the structure of the thesis. It presents the research questions, research objectives, research methodology, outcomes of research and organization of research. This chapter is the introduction and brief of the research.

II. Chapter Two: Literature Review

It reviews and study the relevant literature related to conservation and adaptive re- use of heritage buildings. It studies the conservation approaches, international convention and charters, related conservation guidelines and historical and architectural background of George Town. Besides that, it also discusses about the typology of shophouse in George Town and OUV of George Town WHS.

III. Chapter Three: Research Methodology

This chapter elaborates the method used to conduct the research. It explains how the site and buildings are selected for this research. Besides that, it provides an understanding on how the data collection has been conducted and analyzed.

(29)

8

IV. Chapter Four, Chapter Five, Chapter Six & Chapter Seven: Case Studies

It discusses the selected case studies about adaptive re- use of shophouse in George Town WHS. It presents 4 selected shophouses which already adaptive re- used for new function such as private office (Chapter Four:

Case Study One), bistro, museum, Chinese medical hall & hotel (Chapter Five:

Case Study Two), private residence (Chapter Six: Case Study Three) and art gallery (Chapter Seven: Case Study Four). It evaluates the selected case studies based on the selected indicators: roof profile, layout/ space, material & colour scheme and front façade design.

V. Chapter Eight: Findings and Analysis

It provides an in- depth analysis and discussion on the evaluation of adaptive re- use of shophouses in George Town WHS. The evaluation of adaptive re- use of shophouse is based on the selected indicators, conservation guidelines and OUV.

VI. Chapter Nine: Conclusion

It discusses about research overview, research outcome, policy implication and future research. It concludes the research findings of evaluation of adaptive re- use of shophouses in George Town WHS.

(30)

9 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This chapter discusses the relevant literature related to conservation and adaptive re- use of heritage shophouse. It outlines the conservation approaches, international convention & charters and related conservation guidelines. Furthermore, the background of George Town WHS and typology of shophouse in George Town are also discussed in this chapter to provide in- depth understanding of shophouse and Outstanding Universal Value of George Town WHS.

2.2 Adaptive Re- use

Adaptive re-useis the process of adapting old structures for purposes other than those initially intended. Most of the buildings will change their use through their lifetime and this will invariably necessitate changes to the internal layout and fabric of the building. Making changes to a building to accommodate a new use or activities is often a means of enabling the continued usefulness of a building.¹ However, the appropriateness of the new use to the building fabric and its integrity does need to be considered. This is important to conserve the historic value of the building.

Apart from above, buildings become redundant for a whole host of reasons, from changing economic and industrial practices, demographic shifts, increasing cost of ________________________________________

¹ Aylin Orbasli (2008). Architectural conservation: principles and practice, UK: Wiley- Blackwell, pg. 46

(31)

10

maintenance and primarily because they are no longer suited for the function they were being used for and a viable new use has not been identified. For much of their useful life, buildings change incrementally and are continuously updated and adapted to user needs.

While the structure remains the most permanent element, changes are likely to be made to the building envelope and more regularly to the internal layout. Hence, it is clear that reusing an existing historic building is a more sustainable approach than complete demolish and build or replacement with a new building.

Many buildings have proven to be flexible and with a little adaptation capable of accommodating new uses. Surveys have illustrated that many buildings have undergo several renovation throughout the different period in the history and different uses since they were first built. However, it does not mean that all new uses are appropriate for a historic building. If the level of intervention required would cause too much damage to the historic fabric, then this is unlikely to be an appropriate new use. Proposals for a new use must first consider whether the building is appropriate for this use (Example: Does it have enough openings). Secondly, whether the new use and necessary changes protect and enhance the cultural significance of the building. Added to this are the financial consideration linked to the demand in the area for such a use and therefore the ability to realize a financially viable project.

Conversion and adaptation should enhance the cultural significance and qualities of a historic building. Projects that are often the most successful are those that recognize and work with the ‘spirit’ of the building. The qualities of a warehouse space, for example, are the large open spaces, the associated flexibility of the plan and the exposed industrial nature of the materials. Dividing up the space into small rooms like those of a semi-detached house will fail to achieve a distinctive space. Moreover, different building

(32)

11

types require different levels of sensitivity when it comes to conversion. For example, the conversion or adaptive reuse of a church building will need to be more sensitive in choice of a new use, the division of spaces and respect to its former spiritual value.

Tourism today has become one of the prime reasons for the conservation of historic buildings or historic sites like George Town, Penang. The reason is predominantly economic, but means that the view of the outsider can often be the guiding principle in conservation. Tourism often presents a greater incentive to improve the external appearance of the buildings in a historic town. This is because the nice external appearance or building facades will attract more visitors. However, for most visitors, the cultural experience is not limited to historic buildings and monuments, but also includes traditions, daily lifestyle, handicrafts, food and the others. Hence, the conservation of most buildings is dependent on them having a valid and viable use or usefulness. For building owners, investment in maintaining a historic property is most likely to be undertaken when there is a perceived economic benefit, in the form of higher rental income or increase in property value.

In summary, adaptive re-use is the process of adapting old structures for purposes other than those initially intended. There are 4 major aspects or considerations in adaptive re- use such as roof profile, layout/ space, material & colour scheme and front façade design. However, the conversion and adaptation should enhance the cultural significance of a historic building where the appropriateness of the new use to the building fabric and its integrity does need to be considered.

(33)

12

Figure 2.1: The turbine hall at the Tate Modern, London, a museum of contemporary art converted from a former power station.

(Source: Aylin Orbasli (2008)Architectural conservation: principles and practice, UK:

Wiley- Blackwell.)

(34)

13

Figure 2.2: The conversion of the Dreher Brewery in Venice, Italy into residential units.

Making use of the chimney as the escape staircase.

(Source: Aylin Orbasli (2008),Architectural conservation: principles and practice, UK:

Wiley- Blackwell.)

(35)

14

Figure 2.3: The fish market in Izmir, Turkey has been converted into a popular waterside retail complex.

Wiley- Blackwell.)

(36)

15

Figure 2.4: The old warehouses converted into shops and restaurants at the waterfront in Sydney, Australia.

Wiley- Blackwell.)

2.3 Evaluation

Evaluation is the systematic acquisition and assessment of related information to provide useful feedback about some objects. The generic goal of most evaluations is to provide useful feedback which may help in future improvement. The major goal of evaluation should be to influence decision-making or policy formulation through the provision of empirically-driven feedback.²

________________________________________

² Research Methods Knowledge Base. Available at http://www.socialresearchmethods.net. Accessed date:

2 January 2013

(37)

16

There are many different types of evaluations. It is depending on the object being evaluated and the purpose of the evaluation. Perhaps the most important basic distinction in evaluation types is that between formative and summative evaluation.

Formative evaluations strengthen or improve the object being evaluated -- they help form it by examining the delivery of the program or technology, the quality of its implementation, and the assessment of the organizational context, personnel, procedures, inputs, and so on. On the another hand, summative evaluations examine the effects or outcomes of some object -- they summarize it by describing what happens subsequent to delivery of the program or technology, assessing whether the object can be said to have caused the outcome, determining the overall impact of the causal factor beyond only the immediate target outcomes and estimating the relative costs associated with the object.

2.4 Conservation Approaches

Refer to Venice Charter, article 14, historical sites of monument must be the object of special care in order to safeguard their integrity and ensure that they are cleared and presented in seemly manner. The work or conservation and restoration carried out in such places should be inspired by the principles set forth in foregoing articles.³ Besides that, the cultural significance of the historical site should be conserved during the conservation or restoration works. Cultural significance can be defined as aesthetic, historic, scientific or social value for past, present or future generations.⁴ ________________________________________

3 The Venice Charter (1964). Article 14.

4 The Burra Charter (1999). Article 12.

(38)

17

Generally, heritage is object or cultural property passed down from one generation to another. It can be classified into tangible and intangible heritage. There are several definitions of heritage as stated below:

a) “Heritage is something which is passed down from one generation to another.”

Richard Prentice (1994)

b) “Heritage as cultural property that includes both visible and non-visible cultural heritage.” UNESCO (1972)

c) “Tangible or intangible cultural heritage including underwater cultural heritage of tangible form but excluding natural heritage.” National Heritage Act 2005 (Act 645)

According to UNESCO World Heritage Convention 1972, conservation is defined as a guardianship providing for maintenance, preservation or protection from being destroyed or changed in an inappropriate manner. Conservation is not only focuses on tangible heritage, but also intangible heritage such as local cultures. It is concerning on safeguarding the cultural significance of heritage building as well as heritage site.⁵

Besides that, restoration is defined as a highly specialized operation. Its aim is to preserve and reveal the aesthetic and historical value of the monument and is based on respect for original material and authentic documents. Its must stop at the point where conjecture begins and in this case moreover any extra work which is indispensable must be distinct from the architectural composition and must bear a contemporary stamp.⁶ ________________________________________

5 UNESCO (1972). Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, The World Heritage Convention, Paris.

6 The Venice Charter (1964). Article 9.

(39)

18

The restoration of any case must be proceed and followed by an archaeological and historical study of the monument. Apart from that, there are several definitions or explanations of restoration such as below:

a) “Where traditional techniques prove inadequate, the consolidations of monument can be achieved by the use of any modern technique for conservation and construction, the efficacy of which has been shown by scientific data and proved by experience.” Venice Charter, article 10 (1964)

b) “The valid contribution of all period to the building of monument must be respected, since unity of style is not the aim of restoration. When includes the superimposed work of different period, the revealing or the underlayingstate can only be justified in exceptional circumstances and when what is removed is of little interest and the material which is brought to light of great historical, archaeological or aesthetic value and its state of preservation good enough to justify the action, Evaluation of the important of the elements involved and the decision as to what may be destroyed cannot rest solely on the individual in change of the work.” Venice Charter, article 11 (1964)

c) “Replacements of the missing parts must integrated harmoniously with the whole but at the same time must be distinguishable from the original so that restoration does not falsify the artistic or historical evidence.” Venice Charter, article 12 (1964)

d) “Addition cannot be allowed except in so far as they are not detract from the interesting part of the building, its traditional setting, the balance of its

(40)

19

composition and its relation with its surroundings.” Venice Charter, article 13 (1964)

Besides, there is another approach in heritage conservation called preservation.

According to Burra Charter, article 16, preservation means maintaining the fabric of place in its existing state and retarding deterioration.⁷ The owner is not allowed to introduce any types of alteration in space, architectural element and building material.

Normally this approach is used for National Heritage under National Heritage Act 2005 and Category 1 building. Moreover, herewith several definitions or explanations of preservation as stated below:

a) “Preservation is appropriate where the existing state of the fabric itself constitutes evidence of specific culture significance, or where insufficient is available to allow other conservation processes to be carried out.” Burra Charter, arcticle 11 (1999)

b) “Preservation is limited to the protection, maintenance and where necessary, the stabilization of existing fabric but without the distortion of its cultural significance.”

Burra Charter, arcticle 12 (1999)

Furthermore, if a heritage site or building is damaged or losing some part of it, reconstruction approach can help in recovering and reviving the cultural significance of the site. Reconstruction is appropriate and allowed where place is incomplete through damage or alteration and where it is necessary for its survival, or where it recovers the

________________________________________

7 The Burra Charter (1999). Article 16.

(41)

20

cultural significance of the place as whole.⁸ Apart from that, reconstruction is limited to the completion of a depleted entity and reproduction of fabric the form of which is know from physical and/or documentary evidence. It should not constitute the majority of the fabric of a place.

According to Standard for Rehabilitation and Guideline for Rehabilitation Historical Buildings by US Department of Interior, rehabilitation is defined as the process of returning a property to a state of utility, through repair or alteration, which makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portion and features of the property which are significant to its historical, architectural and cultural value. It ensures continuous usage of heritage building. However, the authority should provide limitation or guidelines for rehabilitation to safeguard the architectural significance of heritage building.

2.5 The Historical Background and Local Communities of George Town

Penang was part of Kedah when western ships sailed through the Straits of Malacca for the first time. In the history of Penang, Penang was named with different names by different group of people in the past. The island was known as Pulau Kesatu by the local, and also as Pulo Pinang to voyagers since Admiral Cheng Ho in the early 15^th century because Tamils came to trade in pinang (areca nut) in Penang. However, the Portuguese people who stopped at Batu Feringgi (Foreigner’s Rock) to refill their ship with fresh water on their way to Malacca, marked Penang as Pulo Pinaom on their ________________________________________

8 The Burra Charter (1999). Article 17, 18 & 19.

(42)

21

maps. Then, when Francis Light obtained Penang island in August 1786, he named it as

“Prince of Wales Island”. After that, Penang became part of India. The settlement to be built on the north-eastern cape of the island was named “George Town” after the reigning British monarch, King George III. The cape was formerly known as Tanjong Penaigre due to the hardy ironwood trees called penaga found in George Town, which Light induced the original inhabitants and early settlers to clear by firing a cannon full of coins into the forest. That’s the reason why locals still call George Town as Tanjung.⁹¹⁰

In early Penang, regional traders brought pepper, clove, nutmeg, gambier and other product of the archipelago to be sold to European, American, Arab, Indian and Chinese ships. Areca nut, bird’s nest and small quantities of tin were mainly exported to the China market. The British traded woolens, chintzes and opium for spices. These trading activities made Penang a happening port.

According to the history of Malay Peninsula, in 1800, a strip of land named Province Wellesley (currently called Seberang Prai) on the opposite main land side of Penang Island was acquired for the security of the port. In 1819, Raffles founded Singapore, and the Penang settlement was left to flounder. In 1826, Penang, Malacca and Singapore were incorporated to form the Straits Settlements with government administration center in Penang. After that, Singapore had overtaken Penang as significant port. After 6 years, in 1832, the capital of the Straits Settlements was transferred to Singapore.

________________________________________

9 Khoo Su Nin(2007), Streets of George Town Penang Fourth Edition, Malaysia:Areca Books, pg 12.

10 Ken Yeang(1992), The Architecture of Malaysia, Amsterdam & Malaysia: The Pepin Press, pg 43.

(43)

22

In the mid-19^th century, a lot of Chinese coolies came to the Malay states like Perak and Selangor as tin miner. In 1867, the administrative control of the Straits Settlements was shifted from India to Singapore. After that, the Suez Canal was opened in 1869, it shorten the sea journey from west to east. This encouraged an increase in trading activity and speed up Penang’s recovery process. After the Pangkor Treaty in 1874 due to Chinese gangster fighting caused British intervention in Malay States. This caused the agriculture and tin potential of the Malay States to be further exploited.

Hence, Penang flourished as the important export centre for northern region, especially after the construction of the Federated Malay States Railway. The golden age of Penang was encouraged the development of tin, rubber and shipping industries. However, commodity crashes ruined some families in the late of 1920s &1930s, and more fortunes were lost in the Second World War. Penang was invaded and occupied by the Japanese from December 1941 until September 1945. ¹¹¹²

In the 1950s, the election of City Councillors was introduced. On 1^st January 1957, George Town was given City status, on the centenary of the formation of the first Municipal Council of George Town. The population then stood at 234855. When Malaysia attained Independence in August 1957, Penang joined this new country (Malaya) as a State. Today, George Town is the WHS, West Malaysia’s northern states and the Indonesia- Malaysia- Thailand Growth Triangle. Currently, Penang has about 1.3 million inhabitants and over three million tourists a year.

________________________________________

11 History of Malaya: 2000BC-1963AD, http://www.city.com.my/malaya-history.htm. Accessed date: 2 January 2013.

(44)

23

Figure 2.5: A painting of Penang dated 1837.

(Source: Ken Yeang (1992), The Architecture of Malaysia, Amsterdam: Pepin Press.)

Figure 2.6: “Insulae Indiae Orientalis”, a mid-17^th century Dutch map of Southeast Asia by Jodocus Hondius.

(45)

24

Figure 2.7: A British Map of India and part of Southeast Asia by E. Bowen, 1747.

In the early period, the Malays from Kedah state are the largest group of community in Penang. Besides the Malay community, there were other communities such as Europeans, Arabs, Armenians, Jews, Burmese, Thais, Bugis, Ambonese, Javanese, Acehnese, Rawanese, Minangkabaus, Tamils, Malabaris and other South Indian groups such as Gujeratis, Benggalis, Parsis and other North Indian groups;

Cantonese, Hokkiens, Hakkas, Teochews, Hainanese, and other Southern Chinese groups; and later there were Ceylonese, Sikhs, Japanese, Filipinos and etc.¹³ All these groups played important roles in the creation and development of George Town city.

________________________________________

(46)

25

Nowadays, Penang is having three main ethnics which are Malay, Chinese and Indian.

Besides these three main ethnics, there are many minor ethnics in Penang.

“Two special groups which are closely identified with Penang are the Peranakan Jawi and the Straits Chinese, both urban elites and cultural hybrids which were relatively more receptive to European influence than their contemporaries. They are introduced here to provide an insight into the rich, complex and as yet little understood Straits subcultures which have played a prominent role in Penang’s unique development.” Khoo Su Nin (2007).

In the early years, the community who formed the most important trading community in Penang is the Indian Muslims community. The main group consisted of Tamil Muslims who were also called Keling or Chulia. When the traders settled in Penang, they took local wives and their descendants were called Peranakan Jawi. “The Indian Muslim communities were well- established in 17^th century Aceh, 15^th century Malacca and in Kedah sometime before, having married into the top echelons of those societies.” Khoo Su Nin (2007). As leaders of the Muslim community in Penang, they built waqaf, mosques and sekolah pondok (Malay vernacular schools).

In Penang’s old years, the main trading activity was the pepper and spice trade between Penang with Aceh which dominated by Indian Muslim and Arab merchants in Penang. After 1870s, the Indian Muslim commercial class reduced rapidly and a large number of the Chinese began to reach Penang, Perak and Selangor in large number to work as tin miners. At the same time, the Hindus from Southern India were being widely imported as plantation labour. Then, in 1930s, the culture of “Peranakan Jawi” was

(47)

26

threatened due to most of the Indian Muslim descent had identified themselves as Malay.

14

In the beginning, male Chinese traders took local wives in the Nanyang, the Straits Settlement. Their descendants are known as Baba Nyonya who maintained some elements of the indigenous lifestyle. Majority of the local born Chinese were stayed in the urban areas of the Straits Settlement including George Town. Due to the multi- racial society influence, the early Straits Chinese were fluent in Malay, the lingua franca of the Straits trading world during that time. The Straits Chinese had an advantage in the trading opportunities compared to other Chinese traders from China due to the Straits Settlement is surrounded by islands of the Indonesian archipelago and their established connection or relationship with the archipelago trading community. ^{15 16}

“When their dominance in Penang society was challenged by later waves of Chinese migrants, they expanded their numbers by encouraging the chain migration of relatives from their clan villages in China, organized with the support of clan associations…………Eventually, the Straits Chinese minority came to ally itself with the Straits government, sending their children for western education. The group evolved into a western- educated elite………... The Straits Chinese came to be identified by social- economic class, political orientation, gentrified lifestyle and an eclectic taste for the finest things from all cultures. While not all those born in the Straits could apply, the Chinese who attained enough wealth could claim to be Straits Chinese by association and by assimilation.” Khoo Su Nin (2007)

________________________________________

14 Khoo Su Nin(2007),Streets of George Town Penang Fourth Edition, Malaysia:Areca Books, pg15.

15 Ken Yeang(1992), The Architecture of Malaysia, Amsterdam & Malaysia: The Pepin Press, pg 15.

16 Khoo Su Nin(2007),Streets of George Town Penang Fourth Edition, Malaysia:Areca Books, pg16.

(48)

27

The Baba Nyonya in Penang speak local Hokkien dialect mixing with some Malay words. Meanwhile, the Baba Nyonya at the southern part of the Straits Settlement such as Malacca and Singapore speak a Malay patois with Hokkien words. Today, the descendants of Straits Chinese have become a unique community which is different Chinese at other countries around the world. For example, the Chinese is Malaysia can speak few languages such as Malay, English, Mandarin and local dialects.

2.6 Urban Development of George Town

In the beginning, Francis Light assigned streets in the commercial town to the Eurasian, Chinese and Indian Muslim communities. The Malay community settled in a

“Malay Town” on the southern fringe of George Town before it was consolidated by Tengku Syed Hussain from Aceh. During that time, the communities were differentiated by economic activities involved, races and their origin countries, while Europeans were reserved North beach for themselves. ¹⁷

Before Francis Light passed away in 1794, he had laid out a gridiron of streets as the first streetplan of George Town consisted of Light Street, Beach Street, Chulia Street and Pitt Street (currently called Jalan Masjid Kapitan Keling). These four streets made up a rectangle. Beyond this gridiron, the streets developed without systematic planning, mostly are informal housing or quarters and unclear land ownership. In townplan published in 1798 by Captain Home Briggs Popham provide an idea of development of George Town twelve years after founded by Francis Light. No jetties were constructed at

________________________________________

17 Khoo Su Nin(2007),Streets of George Town Penang Fourth Edition, Malaysia:Areca Books, pg 17

(49)

28

that time. It shows the Portuguese Church in Church Street, the cemetery at the West of Penang Road. Besides that, there were paddy fields at area near to Leith Street. The Malay town along the sea front also shown in the Popham’s plan. The Chulia Mosque is plotted at Chulia Street, while another mosque and a tomb is now occupied by Kapitan Keling Mosque. Chulia Street which is near to the port caused its rapid development as main commercial area in George Town. Chulia Street was named after the Coromandel Indians who play an important role in Penang’s business community. ¹⁸

During the town planning introduced by the Municipal authorities after Francis Light, each stage of expansion of George Town required the reclamation of swamp land.

In the early 19^th century, the town developed towards the Prangin Creek and the Bound Ditch (currently called Transfer Road). In the mid-19^th century, the George Town city was expanded to Larut Road, Anson Road, Seang Tek Road and Magazine Road. In the town, a lot double storey shophouses were built. Some of the shophouses built during that period had internal air wells but most are without back lanes.

“Leading Chinese traders lived in elite shophouses until the turn of the 20^th century, when they began to move out into the suburbs. There are also many 19^th century ensembles comprising primarily residential rowhouses built by clan associations or by patriarchs for their kin.” Khoo Su Nin (2007). In the late 19^th century until the early 20^{t h} century, many well design and constructed bungalows with gardens were constructed in George Town. The earlier timber shophouses and kampung houses with attap roof were reconstructed using more durable material such as brick and fire

________________________________________

18 Ken Yeang(1992),The Architecture of Malaysia, Amsterdam & Malaysia: The Pepin Press, pg 45 & 46.

(50)

29

resistant terracotta roof tiles. It was an important turn in shophouse design to protect George Town against the blazes which caused several damages.¹⁹²⁰

Due to the trading activities and port, Beach Street was developed into Penang’s main commercial and financial district in the late 19^th century. In 1884, the first branch of the Hong Kong & Shanghai Bank in Malay Peninsula was located at Beach Street. After that, the present boundaries of George Town were demarcated to border on Tanjung Tokong, Waterfall Road, Boundary Road, Green Lane, Free School Road and Perak Road.

With the economic and population boom in the early 20^th century, commercially rentable terrace houses were developed as a form of property investment. All prewar rented properties came under the Control of Rent Act (1966)which explains not only the widespread survival of shophouse ensembles in George Town, but also the original condition or dilapidation of these buildings. The Rent Control Act was repealed in September 1997, taking full effect by the turn of the millennium where many tenants of shophouse forced to move out.

________________________________________

19 Ken Yeang(1992),The Architecture of Malaysia, Amsterdam & Malaysia: The Pepin Press, pg 54

20 Khoo Su Nin(2007),Streets of George Town Penang Fourth Edition, Malaysia:Areca Books, pg 18

(51)

30

Figure 2.8: Aerial View of George Town In 1960’s.

(Source: Penang Past and Present 1786-1963, A Historical Account of the City of George Town since 1786, Malaysia: City Council of George Town, Penang (1963)

(52)

31

Figure 2.9: Aerial View of George Town in 1990’s.

(Source: Penang Past and Present 1786-1963, A Historical Account of the City of George Town since 1786, Malaysia: City Council of George Town, Penang (1963)

(53)

32

Figure 2.10: Popham Map 1798.

Figure 2.11: Map of George Town 1803.

(Source: George Town UNESCO World Heritage Incorporated Office)

(54)

33

(55)

34

Figure 2.14: Settlement Growth of George Town.

(56)

35

2.6.1 Architectural Background of George Town

In the past, the area of George Town can be easily divided into two parts, which are the small colonial district and the very large shophouses area that include China Street and little India districts. One of the unique characteristics of George Town is the shophouse area. The shophouse buildings can be considered as a unique style of architecture in Southeast Asia with interesting combination of Portuguese and Chinese architecture and using typical European and Malay arts as decorative motif.

In the perspectives of social and architecture, Penang was the point where the Anglo-Indian empire encountered the Chinese Civilization in Malay Peninsula.

This is the reason why the designs of shophouses in George Town have influences of European, Chinese and India. The earliest structures or buildings in Penang were erected using nibong palm by local Malays. After that, Francis Light imported Indian and Chinese brick-layers from India and China to build masonry buildings. In 1887, the ordinance of 20 feet “fire breaks” between every 200 feet of terraced house was implemented and terracotta roof tiles began to be used and replaced attap as the main roofing material in the urban area to protect George Town against the blazes that caused damages. George Town has the region’s largest pool of prewar buildings and a reasonably intact historic centre.²¹

In 19^th century, South Indian Muslim architecture started to be popular in Penang. For examples: mosques, shrines and domestic buildings. Besides that, Penang also showcases the Southern Chinese shophouse, mansion and temple ________________________________________

21 Ken Yeang(1992),The Architecture of Malaysia, Amsterdam & Malaysia: The Pepin Press, pg 51