This document is the final report for an architectural design project located in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. It includes sections on the project background, site analysis, design strategy, environmental strategies, and final design portfolio. The project involved designing a Cultural Experience Centre near Central Market to promote local culture. Site investigations explored the area's history and current users. Design concepts focused on reconnecting communities and users to the site through cultural education and public spaces. Precedent studies and spatial programming informed the final design, which features a central plaza, green spaces, and permeability between indoor and outdoor areas to activate the site.

1. Nicholas Wong Yew Khung
0328559
Tutor : Ar. Jasmi Saleh
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN PROJECT
FINAL REPORT

2. Content
1.0 Project background
2.0 Site investigation & contextual studies
- Macro site analysis
3.0 Design strategy & exploration
-Micro site analysis
-Design narrative
-Precedent studies
-Spatial programming & organization
-Responses to approaches & building plan
4.0 Environmental and technological strategies
-Sustainability concepts
-Structural concept
5.0 Final Design Portfolio
-Final boards
6.0 Reflective journal
-Progress journal
-Reflective Journal
7.0 Reference

3. Project brief
With our given site, Jalan Tun Tan Cheng Lock, Kuala Lumpur, right in front of Central
Market, we were to design a Cultural Experience Centre that focuses on empowering
the people’s appreciation of their own culture and environment. The project
emphasizes on designing a venue for local artists, performers and alike where they
can share, teach, train and explore their craft. The project also emphasizes on the
impact of the building onto the immediate neighbourhood to create a more engaging
and inviting, hence, encouraging people to stay, connect and collaborate.
Project requirement
We were assigned to design a cultural experience centre that requires spatial
requirement such as learning and training space, which include workshop and
classroom, exhibition and showcase space, artist studio and theatre, educational
space such as library and resource centre, and residence for artist. we need to design
a building of 2000sqm within the site.
Project objectives
To provide a platform for artists and locals/tourist to gather and
exchange cultural experience
To promote local arts and craft
To educate local and tourist about our local culture
Kuala Lumpur - Pasar Seni
Kuala Lumpur is a culturally rich city that is regularly visited by local and visitors.
In the midst of its commercial success, and with its contemporary art scene and
the resurgence of activities by the city galleries, museums are also becoming one
of the known cultural hubs of Malaysia. Pasar Seni is the heart of the old city
center, its historical and cultural value is important to all Malaysian.
1.0 Project background
Location plan Key plan Site plan

4. History background of central market
1888
- Central market served as wet market for inhabitants and tin miner before it was constructed as a fix structure to house all merchant
- It continued to expand from 1889-1930s, the layout was supplementary to have present size and art deco fascia. It was named as pasar
besar.
1936
- The size of central market measuring 123.7 meters long, 60.8 meters wide and 7.9 meters high.
- The building all cladded with “Calorex” glass to minimize the entry of sunlight.
1980’s
- The Malaysian Heritage Society pleaded against the termination of Central Market. In 1985, it was refurbished and settled into a center
for arts and crafts.
- Melewar LEisure Sdn. Bhd took the possession of the building and used to encourage the Malaysian Culture through the auctions of
Malaysian Arts and Handicrafts goods.
2000’s
- Central Market Sdn. Bhd. acquired the lease from Melewar Group via an open tender by Pengurusan Danaharta Nasional Bhd and till
then, the Central Market has been controlled by Central Market Sdn.
- Kasturi walk was opened on February 2011, Central market Sdn. Bhd set up 55 alfresco lifestyle retails and F&B kiosk.
- Until now, Central Market has 300 shops "retailing handicraft and textiles, souvenirs, collectibles and restaurants
1.0 Project background

5. 2.0 Site investigation & contextual studies
Morphology
1888 - The beginning
- Located within chinese dominant part
- People set up business along jalan tun cheng lock, due to its close distance to business centre.
- Central market was built to cater the needs of the community
1936 - Urban growth
- ty center continue to expand before it turned into a federal territory in 1974
- Financial building was introduced into the socio-economic needs at upper portion of our parcel.
- White collar group was introduced into the local residence communThe ciity
1980 - Capital city
- Residence moved out to the surrounding area.
- Wet market relocated.
- Original central market become centre of art & craft .
- The reminiscence of wet market fading , local residence was replaced by people who wants a job or tourist.
- This is also when tourism was introduced into the existing activities.

6. Morphological Social Impact
Disconnection
- Shift of capital , people / families moved out for better opportunity
- Rapid development changed the social & economical structure of the site
- The traditional business / artisans that offer daily necessities closed down when they couldn't sustain themselves.
- People move out explained the dormant spaces at site. Even now, still have plenty of business are struggling to
survive.
- The influx of foreign workers create social issues and make more local shift out.
Fading identity
- Vendors choose machine made product over handmade to save time and money, there is no diversity in product
they sell.
- Without hands on experience or knowing the story behind the product, people lost interest to the culture, the
identity of site slowly fading.
2.0 Site investigation & contextual studies

7. Users at site
Tourist
main user that cover most of the activities at site
Mostly visit heritage buildings and local landmark
Central market act as the intersection part of their
movement
White collar
Monotonous movement around the site:
Transportation hub - Company - Eateries
Won’t spend time linger around the site unless for
daily necessity.
Vendor
Most of the vendors will stay in their shop other
than lunch time.
Very little movement at site.
2.0 Site investigation & contextual studies

8. Blue collar
Travel around different part of district due to
work.
Mostly from transportation hub to private/public
buildings.
Artist
Most of the artist stayed in their shop at central
market annexe.
Lack of movement and exposure, which is only
the one small part of the community.
Overall
Other than artist and vendors, most of the users
treat the site like a interchange session, even the
site characterized by layers of diversity, and fill
with different kind of possibility, but no emotional
attachment to the site is a threat for the site.
Users at site
2.0 Site investigation & contextual studies

9. Micro site analysis
Sun path & plantation
Site is exposed to sunlight from 8am
to 5pm, provide enough lighting and
unbearable hot temperature.
Most of the trees are young, cannot
provide shades effectively.
Ingress / Egress
The site has four sides ingress &
egress, one is vehicular another
three is for pedestrian.
Flexible for pedestrian to enter or
exit
The only vehicle ingress / egress
will slow down the traffic and cause
traffic jam.
Site intensity
More people gather at kasturi walk &
central market
High human traffic and narrow street
Lesser people gather under the
railway
used as shortcut, with bigger public
space.
Edge
Site located at the intersection of
different edge
The edge cut off the circulation to
site and create visual barrier.
2.0 Site investigation & contextual studies

10. - provide pedestrian walkway
- The Young trees at roadside don't provide sufficient shades
- only few restaurant have overhang roof for shading
- The buildings provide shades for the street
- with shading and pedestrian walkway, users will use secondary
road more often.
- Tourist hotspot like kasturi walk, vendors set up their booth in
front of the shophouse, leave a narrow walkway for user to pass
by.
- Discomfort distance between users, bad air circulation as well.
- Service lane with shading and intimate space, eatery and
market, local users more than tourist.
- Left over from eateries and market cause hygienic problem
- Empty booth will be shelter for the homeless or drug addict at
night, worsen the safety issues.
Conclusion
- People move from primary road to
secondary/service lane bcs of shades and short
route to destination.
- Most of the users at site are from pasar seni, katsuri
walk and petaling street, which will be the main
entrance of the building.
Path
2.0 Site investigation & contextual studies

11. visual impact to site
1
2
3
4
1 2
3
The site welcome the users when they pass under the
railway, giving a sense of surprise
The wau statue act as a entrance statement, welcome
the arrival of people.
Unfortunately the cramp booth blocked the view
towards central market.
4
A humble entrance from the back of central market,
letting users to experience the untold story of the
central market by walking along the alley to site.
From narrow street and suddenly enlighten by an
open space that fill with many possibilities.
Different entrance and visual impact can give users
different experience.
Visual 1,2 & 3 shows sense of surprise and grand
entrance statement which would be better option
for main entrance of cultural centre.
Visual 4 shows that it can be a poetic/service
entrance for user and workers to load/unload cargo.
2.0 Site investigation & contextual studies

12. Design narrative
1. Disconnection between community
Segregation between local communities due to the
rapid development that changed the social structure,
and the influx of foreign workers create social issues.
Locals and tourist lack
of cultural education.
Lack of platform for artist &
performers to promote
culture,
3.0 Design strategy & exploration
The design narrative focus on the site issues, which will be the main focus of the project to solve it. There will be two issues under one topic, which is “disconnection”.
2. Disconnection between users and site
Lack of designated public
realm
Site act as a transition space, there
is no emotional attachment for
users.

13. Reconnection between communities
Bring different community together and exchange cultural experience.
Educate locals and tourists about our traditional culture through hands on
experience.
Provide platform for artist and performers to earn a living and promote our local
culture.
Reconnection of users to site
Through workshop and exhibition, make people
understand the value of our culture.
Provide public space to cater the needs of users,
activate the site throughout the year, provide an
escape for citizen from urban life.
Reconnection
A cultural center that reconnect different communities, promote local culture and provide public realm for site users to
stay and gather, in order to revitalize the cultural vibe of the Pasar Seni.
3.0 Design strategy & exploration
Design narrative
The design concept will focus on how the building can solve the current site issues.

14. Precedent studies
Arnhem's ArtA Cultural Center
Architect : NL Architect
Competition name : Cultural Park National Competition
(Netherland)
The design centers around the ground-level Art Square, a
large space which opens up to the street outside.
Architects make the building more welcoming by elevation
the floors, turn the void beneath it to communal space to
create connection between users.
Establish vertical spatial hierarchy and visual permeability/
interest, create a sustainable environment via outdoor
greenery space on every floor, to provide shades for
indoor spaces.
3.0 Design strategy & exploration

15. Greece cultural park
Architect : Anagram Architecture & Urbanism
Competition name : Cultural Park National Competition
The public space presents a unified and flexible space
for both everyday leisure time and large scale events to
take place
The park provide showroom for art exhibition,
amphitheatre & public space for performances, and a
forest park that provide an escape from urban life for
citizen.
The cultural park accommodate the needs of busy
citizen , creating interaction and promote their culture,
which will attract more users to site.
3.0 Design strategy & exploration
Precedent studies

16. Spatial programming & organization
Building concept
The overall design language promote
openness and public space to enhance
the connection & interaction between
users.
Public realm provide space and shades
to cater needs of users, green park
activate the site throughout the year,
provide an escape for citizen from urban
life, which will attract more users to site.
Entrance & anchor point
Identify the major ingress/egress of the site, users come
from different direction of the site but most of them are from
Katsuri walk and Petaling street.Based on this create a
central plaza as an anchor point to cater users from different
entrance.
Access & building frontage
Determine vehicle access & drop off, raise
building block around the central plaza to
provide shades and create privacy for the
public realm.
Set back for connection
Set back the building on every floor to and turn the void
underneath it to a public space which connect to katsuri
walk, in order to establish connection between the building
and the site. Vertical garden are created to provide shades,
extend green belt for thermal comfort.
Differentiate function
Differentiate function of building block, oval
block as public gallery for public access,
red color block for private function such as
workshop space.
3.0 Design strategy & exploration

17. Vehicle access
Access building from the main road
Jalan Tan Tun Cheng Lock, ramp
leads to basement carpark with
delivery lane.
3.0 Design strategy & exploration
Responses to approaches & building plan

18. Public space
Ground floor is fully public, and split into different
function to cater the needs of different users.
Permeability
Multiple entrances and open circulation create
connections to existing pedestrian network.
3.0 Design strategy & exploration
Responses to approaches & building plan

19. Complimenting surrounding
activities
Plaza as a gathering space can be an
assembly point, performance stage and
an extension of booth from katsuri walk.
3.0 Design strategy & exploration
Responses to approaches & building plan

20. Viewing deck
Corridor in front of every space can be a
viewing platform to appreciate the view or to
watch different activities & performance going
on in the ground floor public space.
3.0 Design strategy & exploration
Responses to approaches & building plan
Wired mesh facade
Wire mesh façade provide visual interest and
permeability which give people in the building
some privacy, the used of plantation is to
provide shades during the day.

21. Green belt
Green roof, roof garden, and planter create green
belt that create positive urban wall that extends
the activities from river of life.
Green park also helps urban citizen escape from
the concrete jungle.
Prevailing wind
South-west prevailing wind will be filter by
the green belt, removing heat & creating airy
environment.
3.0 Design strategy & exploration
Responses to approaches & building plan

22. 3.0 Design strategy & exploration
Elevations

23. 3.0 Design strategy & exploration
Elevations

24. 3.0 Design strategy & exploration
Sections

25. Sustainability concepts
Prevailing wind
South-west prevailing wind will be filter by the green belt,
removing heat & creating airy environment. The building is
elevated to let the wind pass through ground floor for better air
circulation, central courtyard allows for the better breathability.
4.0 Environmental and technological strategies

26. Sun shading
For east/ west side of the building, use overhang roof and trees for shading,
south and north side use wire mesh facade and greeneries for diffused sun light
to conserve energy, and provide better ventilation.
Sustainability concepts
4.0 Environmental and technological strategies

27. Structural concepts
4.0 Environmental and technological strategies

28. Structural concepts
4.0 Environmental and technological strategies

29. Structural concepts
4.0 Environmental and technological strategies

30. 5.0 Final Design Portfolio
Final boards

31. 6.0 Reflective journal
Progress Journals
1. Design & building concept
During the first two weeks of the project I tried to based on the design concept to decide the building function and program. My
initial intention is to provide hybrid public workshop space to attract more users at site to be involved in different workshop, in
order to let them understand more about the local culture, at the same time the building can provide shades and sitting zone for
users to rest when they are exploring pasar seni area, create opportunity for different communities.

32. 6.0 Reflective journal
Progress Journals
2. Floor plan development
After deciding the program and bubble diagram, start to create form and connect different space to make sure the building can
blend in and respond to site well, taking ideas from precedent studies and applied it on the building. The building is elevated
and have ste back to create a communal space on the ground floor to make the entrance more welcoming, providing shades
and gathering space as well. The west side of the building will have a green belt to provide shades and respond to the riverside
walk below the LRT railway.

33. 6.0 Reflective journal
Progress Journals
3. Sections development
After developing building plans and overall look, analyse the section to
see the connection of different floor, how the view respond to site, how
to based on the sun orientation to place the building facade.

34. Reflective Journal
6.0 Reflective journal
2020 year is definitely one of the toughest year in my architecture life, without physical class
and peer mental support it is hard to get through all these, but I’m glad that i learnt a lot of
things from my respective tutor. This project makes me realised to build a good building, it
has to follow the rules and regulations that set by the government to ensure the safety of
users and building feasibility.
This semester i trained myself to use time wisely, and try to manage everything to make sure
im following the project schedule, learning at home might have some difficulties and lack of
resources, but i still managed to pull it off and make it to the end. As the outcome of the
project, Im not satisfy with my building and I think i could do a lot more to perfect it, but every
project is a learning process, i will try harder, learn more about more construction details and
computer skills to make sure I can do better next time.

35. 7.0 Reference
Ching, F. D. (2015). Architecture: Form, space, & order. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Ching, F. D. (1975). Building construction illustrated. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Neufert, E. (2000). Neufert Architects' data. Oxford: Blackwell Science.