Abstract:
Walking streets are a new trend in tourism and urban rehabilitation. Following this trend, the city of Chiang Mai has incorporated elements of the traditional Lanna lifestyle as a central theme in its walking street activities. Reviewing the creation of the Chiang Mai walking street project, it is clear that the idea for the project did not come from the people in the locality but instead, was the result of governmental policy to establish walking streets to boost the economy of Chiang Mai province through tourism. This research is a comparative study of two walking street areas in the city of Chiang Mai - Ratchadamnoen Street and Wualai Street. The research question focuses on the similarities and the differences between the two streets in terms of their physical, social, and economic characteristics, which lead to them hosting successful walking street activities that benefit community commerce. The results of the study were derived from a literature review, related research, and field data collection regarding the study of the areas manifold advantages and traffic volume which allowed the researcher to reach a preliminary conclusion about establishing walking streets to support community commerce. A study was then conducted into the specific differences in the physical, social, and economic characteristics of the two areas to find the common elements which would be used further as criteria in developing the walking street activities to promote community commerce in the context of Chiang Mai. The overall study results revealed that the research hypothesis that both Ratchadamnoen Street and Wualai Street have favorable features for becoming walking streets that promote community commerce is correct. Specifically, it was found that as walking streets, Ratchadamnoen Street was visited most by people outside the area, whereas Wualai Street was visited most by local residents. While the two streets are in different locations of the city and possess different socio-economic elements on the whole, they possess certain common features which differ in detail, namely: 1) the traffic network connecting the activities on the city level with those at the community level, 2) the use of land and buildings that are relevant to the daily life of locals and also relevant to activities attractive to tourists, 3) the appropriate size of the building mass and space for connecting the tourism activity area well with the residential area, 4) the connection of city-level activities on the main street and the community-level activities on the side streets, and 5) governmental participation as well as that of people in the locality in taking care of both areas.