Sustainable Urban Development | Green Impact Indonesia [PDF]

Green Impact Indonesia Low Cost, Low Tech & Low Negative Impact Beranda About Artikel Riset – Research Article Curriculum Vitae (CV)

Type text to search here...



Arsip Posts Tagged ‘Sustainable Urban Development’

The Green Infrastructure for Greening JABODETABEKJUR Januari 18, 2013 gunteitb Tinggalkan komentar The Green Infrastructure for Greening JABODETABEKJUR (Infrastruktur Hijau untuk Menghijaukan JABODETABEKJUR) Oleh: Hermawan Dasmanto ST. Goya Tamara Kolondam ST. Erel Hadimuljono ST. Clifford Sutedjo ST. Martha ST. Gunawan Tanuwidjaja ST. MSc. Strategi ini yang diusulkan ini difokuskan untuk mengatasi 4 masalah utama (sistem dan prasarana transportasi, tata air dan pengendalian banjir, berkurangnya ruang terbuka hijau, global warming dan keterbatasan energi) secara terintegrasi mengikuti: • Penyusunan Green Infrastructure Master Plan yang terdiri dari 3 lapisan transportasi terintegrasi pada setiap jaringannya yaitu Busway, Mass Rapid Transit atau Kereta Api dan Jalan Tol. Hal ini diharapkan akan mengurangi dampak kemacetan dan penghematan energi berbentuk Bahan Bakar Minyak (BBM) yang selama ini terbuang karena kemacetan; • Green Infrastructure yang akan dibangun juga akan mengintegrasian pompa air untuk mengurangi genangan – genangan air di Jakarta Utara atau daerah banjir lainnya, pompa ini akan didukung oleh pembangkit listrik tenaga angin. Kemudian air akan disalurkan dalam ducting dalam Green Infrastructure Network ke daerah – daerah lainnya seperti daerah resapan dan daerah yang lebih rendah; • Memperpanjang jaringan transportasi publik (MRT, Kereta Rel Listrik, Busway dan Angkutan Kota) sampai pedesaan dengan jaminan keamanan dan ketepatan pelayanan yang lebih baik; • Revitalisasi bagian dalam kota, dengan memprioritaskan pembangunan pada tanah – tanah perkotaan yang kosong; • Memfokuskan pembangunan pada jalur kereta api yang telah dibangun dengan pembangunan Super-Block atau High-Density-Mixed Use di kawasan – kawasan sekitar Stasiun MRT, Kereta Rel Listrik dan Busway; • Tidak mendukung penyebaran perkotaan, dengan membatasi harga Nilai Jual Obyek Pajak (NJOP) dan meningkatkan Pajak Bumi dan Bangunan (PBB) kawasan – kawasan pertanian yang produktif dan sulit dijangkau oleh transportasi MRT, Kereta Rel Listrik dan Busway; • Mengusulkan Zona Bisnis Polutif diperuntukkan untuk kegiatan Industri yang polutif seperti industri berat dan khusus di Kawasan Industri yang sudah direncanakan oleh Pemerintah atau Swasta secara terintegrasi; • Mengusulkan Zona Hijau Muda yang mewadahi perumahan, hotel, perkantoran, industri bersih (clean industry), fasilitas pengembangan (R&D facilities), fasilitas rekreasi dan fasilitas komunitas yang menggunakan konsep Bangunan Hijau (Green Building) sesuai dengan Standar Greenship (http://gbcindonesia.org/site/index.php/2012-08-01-03-2531/2012-08-02-03-43-34/rating-tools dan Mulyono, A.L., Silvanus, D.C., Tanuwidjaja, G. ,2012) ; • Mengurangi kepadatan penduduk di kawasan Utara JABODETABEKJUR karena penurunan tanah ekstrim dan potensi genangan banjir; • Menambah sumur resapan sebagai salah satu persyaratan pembangunan baru di Kawasan Kabupaten Bogor, Kota Bogor dan Kabupaten Tangerang yang memiliki kategori laju transmisi air A dan B; • Mengusulkan peningkatan Koefisien Hijau Bangunan dengan atap hijau atau penghijauan vertical yang terintegrasi pada Green Infrastructure (seperti rekomendasi Vidiella, A.S., Schleifer, S.K., Leonart, A., 2010 dan van Uffelen, C., 2011 ), • Mengusulkan mempertahankan tanah – tanah produktif untuk pertanian yang dapat mendukung kebutuhan pangan JABODETABEKJUR, • Mengusulkan dibuatnya rencana prasarana pendukung JABODETABEKJUR terintegrasi dengan Rencana Tata Ruang Wilayah JABODETABEKJUR seperti: o Bahan Bakar Minyak, o Air minum, o Air bersih yang tidak digunakan untuk minum, o Air kotor dan limbah buangan manusia, o Drainase dan Polder Perkotaan, o Pengelolaan sampah (pengurangan, penggunaan kembali dan daur ulang), o Pengelolaan parkir, o Listrik, o Gas alam, o Telekomunikasi. Dapat disimpulkan bahwa 4 isu utama JABODETABEKJUR akan dapat dipecahkan secara integratif jika semua pihak mau menerapkan Konsep Green Infrastructure secara menyeluruh. Link SCRIBD: http://id.scribd.com/doc/120951523/The-Green-Infrastructure-for-GreeningJABODETABEKJUR

Kategori:Desain Arsitektur - Architecture Design, Ekonomi - Economy, Lingkungan Environmental, Sosial - Social, Tata Ruang - Spatial Planning Tag:Climate Change, Flood Mitigation, Green Architecture, Green Infrastructure, Integrated Water Resource Management, Low Impact Development, Sustainable Urban Development

Integrated & Smart Design for Urban Green Spaces Juli 13, 2012 gunteitb Tinggalkan komentar Gunawan TANUWIDJAJA Lecturer Petra Christian University, Surabaya [email protected] DR. Doni J. WIDIANTONO Head of Sub-Directorate General Planning Directorate of Programming and Partnership, Spatial Planning Directorate II, Ministry of Public Works, Indonesia INDONESIA Radiman RASYAD Urban Planner PT, Rifa Bestari INDONESIA Agus Sudarman Researcher Urban Design Lab INDONESIA ABSTRACT Jakarta has been transformed to a mega-city covering Jakarta, Bogor, Tangerang, Bekasi, Depok, Puncak and Cianjur in less than 3 centuries. And The Central Government has been seriously involved in coordinating the planning, design and development control in the area. Unfortunately it still faces less sustainable issues, such as: floods, reduction of green open space, environmental degradation. To improve the spatial quality of Greater Jakarta Metro Region, to increase the community awareness and participation and to provide employment and opportunities in the global economic crisis, a program named Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program/ SUSIP (or Program Peningkatan Kualitas Tata Ruang/ P2KTR) was proposed and implemented with integrated approach in Urban Planning and Design in 8 locations incluiding Cirendeu Open Space Redesign. The Redesign of Cirendeu Open Space could be categorised as “Smart Design” due to professional approach of the consultants, excellent evaluation, active participation of the stakeholders, sustainable Local SUSIP Organisation, the economic sustainability approach of the Open Space design and management, the sizeable open space area for outdoor activities, and excellent construction and landscape implementation. Although facing challenges, the “Smart” Urban Planning and Design have been successfully implemented in Cirendeu. This approach should be replicated to other areas Indonesia to improve the Spatial Quality and Sustainability of all Urban Developments. Keywords: Smart and Integrated Design, Stakeholders’ Participation, Improving Green Open Space, Sustainable Urban Development. Link SCRIBD: http://www.scribd.com/doc/99978221/Tanuwidjaja-Integrated-Smart-Design-For-Petra Kategori:Desain Arsitektur - Architecture Design, Ekonomi - Economy, Lingkungan Environmental, Sosial - Social, Tata Ruang - Spatial Planning Tag:Improving Green Open Space, Smart and Integrated Design, Stakeholders’ Participation, Sustainable Urban Development

CHALLENGES IN INTEGRATED PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION IN METROPOLITAN CITIES IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES, CASE STUDY: SUSTAINABLE URBAN SPATIAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Juni 24, 2010 gunteitb Tinggalkan komentar Written by: 1 Widiantono, Doni Janarto, 2 Tanuwidjaja, Gunawan, 3 Rasyad, Rasdiman

1 Dr. M.Eng.Sc. Ir., Head of Sub-Directorate Inter-Regional Cooperation, Spatial Planning

Directorate II, Ministry of Public Works, Indonesia, (Kasubdit Lintas Wilayah II, Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum) 2 MSc. Envt Mgt, ST., Urban Planner & Researcher, Green Impact Indonesia Integrated Urban, Drainage and Environmental – Planning and Design Email: [email protected] https://greenimpactindo.wordpress.com/about/ 3 M.Si., Ir., Urban Planner PT, Rifa Bestari

Would be presented in “Cities. More or Less” The 5th Conference of the International Forum on Urbanism (IFoU) 24th – 26th February 2011, National University of Singapore (NUS) In Singapore, Session “D – Planning and New Approaches to Urban Governance.* Abstract: Jakarta has developed from simple port-city to a mega-city covering Jakarta, Bogor, Tangerang, Bekasi, Depok, Puncak and Cianjur in less than 3 centuries. And The Central Government has been seriously involved in coordinating the planning and development control in the area. Unfortunately it still faces less sustainable issues, such as: floods, reduction of green open space, environmental degradation. To improve the spatial quality of Greater Jakarta Metro Region, to increase the community awareness and participation and to provide employment and opportunities in the global economic crisis, we proposed a program named Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program/ SUSIP (or Program Peningkatan Kualitas Tata Ruang/ P2KTR). This program was implemented with integrated approach in Urban Planning and Development as well as integrated water management perspective. We tried suggesting 8 locations for SUSIP implementing strategies of protecting the critical land in the upstream, providing regional open spaces in midstream and mitigating the flood with non-structured measures in the downstream of Jakarta Metro Region. Further, we would like to explain the successful implementation of SUSIP in Cirendeu area. The Improvement of Cirendeu Open Space could be considered “More Sustainable and Successful” due to professional approach of the consultants, excellent evaluation, active participation of the stakeholders, sustainable Local SUSIP Organisation, the economic sustainability approach of the Open Space design and management, the sizeable open space area for outdoor activities, and excellent construction and landscape implementation. Although facing challenges, we found that Integrated Urban Planning, Development Control and Implementation have been successfully implemented in Jakarta Metro Region, especially in Cirendeu. This approach should be replicated to other areas in Jakarta Metro Region and Indonesia to improve the Spatial Quality and Sustainability of all Urban Developments. Keywords: Integrated Urban Planning, Development Control and Implementation, Stakeholders’ Participation in Spatial Quality Improvement, Economic Sustainability of the Open Spaces, Improving Green Open Space, Sustainable Urban Development.

INTRODUCTION Jakarta has developed from simple port-city to a mega-city covering Jakarta, Bogor, Tangerang, Bekasi, Depok, Puncak and Cianjur in less than 3 centuries. [1] Because of its importance in governmental as well as economic function, the Jakarta Metro Region or Jabodetabekpunjur region was designated as National Strategic Area in Government Regulation (PP) No.26 Year 2008. And The Central Government has been seriously involved in coordinating the planning and development control in the area. [2] Figure 1. Jakarta Metro Region Rapid Expansion from 1972 to 2005 [3]It is clearly seen that less stringent urban planning and development control implementation create urban sprawling which are less sustainable.Source: Dardak, H. and Poerwo, I.F. Directorate of Spatial Planning, Public Works Department (2007), Dissemination of Act no 26 Year 2007 on Spatial Planning (Undang-Undang No. 26 Tahun 2007 tentang Tata Ruang) Figure 2. Jakarta Metro Region Administration Map[4]Source: Directorate of Spatial Planning, Public Works Department (2009), Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP) – Executive Presentation Table …. Jakarta Metro’s Region Demography [5] Source: Indonesian Statistics Board (Badan Pusat Statistik) (2007) Municipality or Province Regency (Kota atau (Provinsi) Kabupaten)

No

Population Number Area Year 2007 (persons)

2

3

4

5

6

7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Average Popula-tion Density

201,69

10.752

108

129,19

12.660

127

139,56

8.584

86

48,13

16.916

169

145,73

11.955

120

164,54

9.899

99

1.110,38

3.198

32

210,4

10.189

102

1.263,88

1.682

17

200,29

7.339

73

116,85

7.746

77

2.388,93

1.780

18

290,82

1.275

13

5.919,28

4.055

41

(sq km)

East Jakarta Municipality(Kota 2.168.601 Jakarta Timur) West Jakarta Municipality(Kota 1.635.485 Jakarta Barat) Jakarta North Jakarta Province Municipality(Kota (Provinsi 1.197.970 Jakarta Utara) [6] DKI Central Jakarta Jakarta) Municipality(Kota 814.166 Jakarta Pusat) South Jakarta Municipality(Kota 1.742.177 Jakarta Selatan) Tangerang Municipality(Kota Banten 1.628.753 Tangerang) Province Tangerang Regency (Provinsi (Kabupaten Banten) 3.550.662 Tangerang) [7] Bekasi Municipality 2.143.804 (Kota Bekasi) Bekasi Regency 2.125.960 (Kabupaten Bekasi) Depok Municipality West Java 1.470.002 (Kota Depok) Province Bogor Municipality (Provinsi 905.132 (Kota Bogor) Jawa Barat) Bogor Regency 4.251.838 (Kabupaten Bogor) A part of Cianjur Regency (Sebagian 370.651 Kabupaten Cianjur ) Total 24.005.201

1

Average Popula-tion Density (persons/ sq km)

(persons/ ha)

On the other hand, Jakarta Metro Region faces “less sustainable” urban issues such as: very high population growth, urban sprawling and land speculation. Further, the Region also experiences traffic jams, floods, reduction of green open space, environmental degradation, and urban slums due to less stringent development control. We believe that these phenomena also common in other Metropolitan in Developing Countries. And “More Sustainable” Integrated Urban Planning and Development strategies are urgent for these Mega cities. Figure 3. Jakarta Condition Before and After “Less Sustainable” Development [8]Source: Dardak, H. and Poerwo, I.F. Directorate of Spatial Planning, Public Works Department (2007), Dissemination of Act no 26 Year 2007 on Spatial Planning (Undang-Undang No. 26 Tahun 2007 tentang Tata Ruang)

THE SUSTAINABLE URBAN SPATIAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM IN JAKARTA Based on the Less Sustainable Development issues of Jakarta, we proposed a program named Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program or SUSIP (in Indonesian language: Program Peningkatan Kualitas Tata Ruang/ P2KTR). The purposes of the program were: To improve the spatial quality of Greater Jakarta Metro Region with community participation; To increase the community awareness and participation in improving the environmental quality of their city for protecting the critical land in the upstream for providing regional open spaces in midstream and for mitigating the flood with non-structured measures in downstream of Jakarta Metro Region To provide employment and opportunities in the global economic crisis (as fiscal stimulus in 2009). Later, these purposes were translated into the SUSIP concept which illustrated below: Figure 4. Concept of Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program [9]Source: Directorate of Spatial Planning, Public Works Department (2009), Sustainable Urban Improvement Program (SUSIP) – Executive Presentation The SUSIP was translated in several programs such as: Software Development, Community Empowerment and Implementation Process in the locations. The Software Development of SUSIP was later implemented in 2 sub-programs, The Development of Database and Spatial Information System in Jakarta Metro Region and The Monitoring and Evaluation Program for SUSIP local implementation. The Spatial Information System is very crucial for Sustainable Spatial Planning and Development Control. Therefore, we mapped out the existing programs of Sectored Geographical Information System (GIS) in related Departments. And we would like to integrate these systems for “More Sustainable Decision Making Process” in Jakarta Metro Region, especially for the Spatial Planning and Development Control Process. The Monitoring and Evaluation Program for SUSIP was introduced to prepare the successful implementation of SUSIP, related to the delivering dissemination of concept, norms, standard, guidelines and manual for the project. We also found it is important to record the “Best Practice” of SUSIP for replication in other urban areas in Indonesia. The Monitoring and Evaluation program is also essential in the quality control of the construction and landscape. Further, eight communities in the eight locations were empowered to conduct the three SUSIP’s strategies of protecting the critical land in the upstream, providing regional open spaces in midstream and mitigating the flood with non-structured measures. The eight communities were assisted by 8 professional consultants in the process that are selected by Directorate General of Spatial Planning, Ministry of Public Works. The SUSIP implementation programs would be explained further in the Detail Methodology of SUSIP‘s Implementation Scheme. Integrated Planning and Implementation approach was introduced in SUSIP process. This approach actually tried integrating the macro, mezzo and micro approach for Sustainable Urban Development. This is actually in line with the recommendation of Sustainable Urban expert in advisory team. Figure 5. Integrated Planning & Implementation Strategy Introduced in Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program [10]Source: Directorate of Spatial Planning, Public Works Department (2009), Sustainable Urban Improvement Program (SUSIP) – Executive Presentation The project was conducted between August and December 2009, with general methodology as described below: Preparation (Workshop for TOR Preparation) Tender Implementation (Participatory Planning, Design and Construction) Monitoring and Evaluation Knowledge Management and Dissemination Seminar with various stakeholders Figure 6.General Methodology of Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program [11]Source: Directorate of Spatial Planning, Public Works Department (2009), Sustainable Urban Improvement Program (SUSIP) – Executive Presentation The breakthrough made in SUSIP is the integrated approach in preparation process, implementation, monitoring – evaluation and knowledge management. First, we tried evaluating the previous related programs in Jakarta Metro Region conducted by various agencies. This effort was conducted with series of discussions evaluating the strength, weakness, opportunity and threat from each program; as well as potential for improvement in SUSIP. Secondly, the results of discussions were translated into TOR and Guidelines with assistance of Respective Advisory Team. Our Respective Advisory Team members are: DR. Ir. Alinda Zein, MSc.; Dr. Ir. I.F. Poernomosidhi Poerwo, M.Sc, MCIT. MIHT.; Ir. Dodo Juliman; Ir. Suhadi Hadiwinoto; Drs. Yayat Supriatna. MSP ; and Ir. Joyce Martha Widjaya MSc. (assisted by Gunawan Tanuwidjaja MSc. Env.Mgt. ST.) Thirdly, a Seminar on Sustainable Urban Development was conducted to introduce the new SUSIP concept as well as to increase the stakeholder involvement in the program. Another “More Sustainable” strategy is to involve professional consultants to execute the 10 SUSIP Sub-Program simultaneously. Eight consultants would be involved in facilitating 8 communities in the locations, 1 consultant would monitor the implementation process. And another consultant was in charged with Development of Database and Web-GIS Decision Support System. Unfortunately, some consultants found difficulties in implementing our initial ideas and performed less thoroughly. But, still we found a case study to be “The Best Practice” of Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program in 2009. Figure 7. Methodology of Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program [12]Source: Directorate of Spatial Planning, Public Works Department (2009), Sustainable Urban Improvement Program (SUSIP) – Executive Presentation For SUSIP implementations in the eight locations, we also proposed 9 implementation steps such as: Site Reconnaissance; Program Introduction; Training on Preparation of Community Development Plan (CDP); Workshop on CDP; Recruitment of Skilled Builder; Construction Training; Construction Process; Community Empowerment Monitoring; Transfer of Infrastructure to the Local Government and Local Communities. We believe that this approach is new to the Spatial Planning and Development sector in Indonesia. Because we integrated the evaluation, planning, design and participatory construction in a project with limited time frame. And this project is one successful milestone, but we agree that this SUSIP approach could be refined yet. Table …. Locations of Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program [13] Source: Directorate of Spatial Planning, Public Works Department (2009), Sustainable Urban Improvement Program (SUSIP) – Executive Presentation No

Package

1

SF-05/Up Stream Zone

2

SF-06/Middle Stream Zone

3

SF-08/Middle Stream Zone SF-07/Upper Down Stream Zone SF-04/Middle Down Stream Zone SF-03/Lower Down Stream Zone

4

5

6

Location Cianjur District (Kab Cianjur)

Detail description Kecamatan Sukaresmi, Desa Sukaresmi and Desa Cikanyere Kecamatan Mega Mendung, Desa Bogor District (Kab Bogor) Gadog and Desa Cipayung Bogor Municipality (Kota Kelurahan Katulampa and Sindang Bogor) Rasa Depok Municipality (Kota Situ Pedongkelan , Kelurahan Arman Depok) Bekasi Municipality (Kota Alun – Alun Kota Bekasi Bekasi) South Tangerang Municipality (Kota Kelurahan Cirendeu Tangerang Selatan) Tangerang Municipality (Kota Tangerang)

Kelurahan Periuk Jaya

Jakarta Province (DKI Jakarta)

Kelurahan Bidara Cina

These areas could be defined in the following map: Figure 8. Locations Map of Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program [14]Source: Directorate of Spatial Planning, Public Works Department (2009), Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP) – Executive Presentation Further, we would like to discuss the “Best Sustainable Urban Improvement Program implementation” of 2009 in Cirendeu Administration District, South Tangerang Municipality (Kelurahan Cirendeu, Kota Tangerang Selatan). This particular case study was selected due to professional approach of the consultants, active participation of the stakeholders including the Municipality Agencies, and Communities. Further, the sizeable open space area was found very important serving the surrounding communities. For easier reference, we would like to use the Cirendeu Case for further description.

SUSIP’S BEST PRACTICE CASE STUDY IN CIRENDEU The Cirendeu Administration (Kelurahan Cirendeu) area is located in South Tangerang Municipality, Banten Province, within the Jakarta Metro Region. The South Tangerang Administration was previously under the Tangerang Regency, and it was just formed in 2009. The implementation of the program was assisted by PT. Rifa Bestari. [15] The purpose of Cirendeu Program is to provide regional open space for communities in the mid-stream areas of Jakarta Metro Region. It also was prepared to reduce the run-off from the surrounding residential land to Pesanggrahan River.

MACRO LEVEL ANALYSIS The Cirendeu is located in the South Tangerang and the Pesanggrahan River Catchment. This catchment actually contributes to the flooding in North Jakarta Metro Region. [16] On the other hand, the area is very essential in the preservation of Muara Angke Conservation Area in North Jakarta.[17] Figure 9. Cirendeu Location in Jakarta Metro Region[18]Source: Directorate of Spatial Planning, Public Works Department (2009), Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP) – Executive Presentation Figure 10.General Analysis of River Catchments affected by Cirendeu [19]Source: Directorate of Spatial Planning, Public Works Department (2009), Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP) – Executive Presentation The River Pesanggrahan Catchment (with area of 17.737 Ha) areas was facing rapid land conversion. And more than 60% of the Pesangrahan Catchment was reported as the built up area. This actually created high run-off volume causing extreme flooding in the Pesanggrahan River estuary. [20] This phenomenon was drove by extensive land development in Bogor, Depok, Pondok Cabe, Kebayoran Lama, Cileduk, Kebon Jeruk and Srengseng di West Jakarta. And 38.43% of area of the River Catchment was the residential land use. On the other hand, only 7% of the River Catchment was green open spaces, including the Srengseng Urban Forest. [21] Further, from general analysis of Slope, Geological, Soil Layer as well as Soil Hydrological Group, we found that this area is suitable for application of recharging-well and retention ponds to reduce the flooding occurrence in downstream of Pesanggrahan River. Therefore, we proposed the effective recharging well to be integrated in the landscape and drainage design. Figure 11. General Analysis of Slope of Cirendeu. [22]Source: Ministry of Forestry, Directorate General of Land Rehabilitation and Social Forestry, Office of Catchments Management of Citarum – Ciliwung Rivers (2008), Final Report of Detail Flood Mitigation Plan for Jakarta Metro Region, and Analysis by Green Impact Indonesia. Figure 12.General Analysis of Geological Layers of Cirendeu. [23]Source: Ministry of Forestry, Directorate General of Land Rehabilitation and Social Forestry, Office of Catchments Management of Citarum – Ciliwung Rivers (2008), Final Report of Detail Flood Mitigation Plan for Jakarta Metro Region, and Analysis by Green Impact Indonesia. Figure 13. General Analysis of Geological Structure of Cirendeu. [24]Source: Ministry of Forestry, Directorate General of Land Rehabilitation and Social Forestry, Office of Catchments Management of Citarum – Ciliwung Rivers (2008), Final Report of Detail Flood Mitigation Plan for Jakarta Metro Region, and Analysis by Green Impact Indonesia. Figure 14. General Analysis of Soil Types of Cirendeu. [25]Source: Ministry of Forestry, Directorate General of Land Rehabilitation and Social Forestry, Office of Catchments Management of Citarum – Ciliwung Rivers (2008), Final Report of Detail Flood Mitigation Plan for Jakarta Metro Region, and Analysis by Green Impact Indonesia. Figure 15. General Analysis of Soil Hydrological Groups of Cirendeu. [26]Source: Ministry of Forestry, Directorate General of Land Rehabilitation and Social Forestry, Office of Catchments Management of Citarum – Ciliwung Rivers (2008), Final Report of Detail Flood Mitigation Plan for Jakarta Metro Region, and Analysis by Green Impact Indonesia. Further, limited capacity of 5 from 6 retention ponds in Pesanggrahan Cathcment has increased the flood impact in the downstream. This actually makes the implementation of the program more crucial for flood reduction and increasing the green open space ratio in Jakarta Metro Region. [27]

MEZZO LEVEL ANALYSIS In the Mezzo level, we found that The Cirendeu area was also largely converted to residential land. This was initially caused by issue of Government plan developing Commercial Centre in Pondok Cabe (Southern of Cirendeu) and improving Cirendeu’s Major Arterial in to a Semi-Expressway. The land speculations happened and followed by constructions of numbers of residential clusters. This actually reduced the green open spaces and water bodies in the area. While the reduction of open space actually correlated with increase of runoff of the area and the potential of local inundation as well as the flood occurrences in the downstream. Cirendeu Open Space has become a very important facility to the Community living here. They usually use the Cirendeu Open Space for public sport, cultural festival, school playground, etc. So this open space is a liveable public space. And our program purposes are for improving the spatial quality, as well as the maintaining the open space sustainable. Figure 16. Land Use Analysis of South Tangerang Municipality [28]Source: PT. Rifa Bestari, Final Presentation for Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP) SF-07 in Cirendeu, Ciputat, South Tangerang Municipality, Banten Province, Jakarta Metro Region, Republic of Indonesia. Figure 17. Connectivtity Analysis and Development Pressure of Cirendeu [29]Source: PT. Rifa Bestari, Final Presentation for Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP) SF-07 in Cirendeu, Ciputat, South Tangerang Municipality, Banten Province, Jakarta Metro Region, Republic of Indonesia. Figure 18. Land Use Analysis of Cirendeu [30]Source: Directorate of Spatial Planning, Public Works Department (2009), Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP) – Executive Presentation Figure 19. Topography Analysis of Cirendeu [31]Source: Directorate of Spatial Planning, Public Works Department (2009), Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP) – Executive Presentation Figure 20. Slope Analysis of Cirendeu [32]Source: Directorate of Spatial Planning, Public Works Department (2009), Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP) – Executive Presentation Further, Topography and Slope Analysis were also conducted to complete the macro analysis. And we could conclude that the recharge strategy could be implemented due to flat topography and the run-off direction from surrounding residential areas.

MICRO LEVEL ANALYSIS In the Micro Level Analysis, we found that several potentials to improve the quality of the open space in Cirendeu. The relatively large area (1.5 Ha) of Cirendeu Open Space was used frequently by the Residents of Cirendeu. The clear land status, under the Local Government, would ensure the future sustainability of the green open space. Further, several schools utilised the open spaces for playing ground and sports ground. All these facts actually supported the improvement of the open space. On the other hand, limited access, absence of good drainage system and limited funding of the Local Government must be solved with excellent partnership with the Consultants, Communities as well as other Stakeholders. Lastly, the presence of Low-Income Communities in the area could be helped with SUSIP program which is self-help and community based. The participatory planning, design, construction and planting as well as maintenance of the open space actually would be maximised with this approach. Figure 21. Site Condition of Cirendeu Open Space [33]Source: PT. Rifa Bestari, Final Presentation for Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP) SF-07 in Cirendeu, Ciputat, South Tangerang Municipality, Banten Province, Jakarta Metro Region, Republic of Indonesia. Figure 22. Site Analysis of Cirendeu Open Space [34]Source: PT. Rifa Bestari, Final Presentation for Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP) SF-07 in Cirendeu, Ciputat, South Tangerang Municipality, Banten Province, Jakarta Metro Region, Republic of Indonesia.

THE IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS The implementation of SUSIP in Cirendeu faced great challenges due to limited times and the changing program location. Despite all that, The Directorate General of Spatial Planning, assisted by the Consultant PT. Rifa Bestari succeeded in implementing the Program and could be considered the “Best Practice of SUSIP 2009.” Further, we would like to describe the proposed schedule and the progress report of the program in Cirendeu. The first few months, the program was executed behind the schedule due to extra time needed for finding new location and introducing the SUSIP to Stakeholders. But later on the program run smoothly following the schedule, despite the rainy season in the Jakarta Metro area. Figure 23. Proposed Schedule of SUSIP Local Implementation [35]Source: PT. Rifa Bestari, Final Presentation for Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP) SF-07 in Cirendeu, Ciputat, South Tangerang Municipality, Banten Province, Jakarta Metro Region, Republic of Indonesia. Figure 24. Progress Report of Cirendeu Program [36]Source: Directorate of Spatial Planning, Public Works Department (2009), Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP) – Executive Presentation The Description of Cirendeu Program process could be defined: 1. Site Reconnaissance and New Site Selection 2. Program Introduction was conducted in several level, such as: Meeting with The Local Municipality (comprising the Public Works Local Agency, Environmental Local Agency, Park and Sanitation Local Agency as well as East Ciputat District) Meeting with Local Community level. Due to many stakeholders involved more times were needed to be able to communicate the advantages of the Program to the parties. 1. The Training on Preparation of CDP was conducted in 3 sub-stage such as: Forming of Local Organisation for implementing SUSIP Focus Group Discussion with Ibu Harini Bambang Wahono, an Activist in Environmental Management (Solid Waste Management and Greening the “Urban Village”) from Banjarsari, Jakarta Training on CDP Preparation (Focus Group Discussion, Participatory Mapping, Designing Open Space as well as preparing the Construction Plan and Cost) 1. The Workshop on CDP was conducted with similar methods of the Training (Focus Group Discussion, Mapping, Landscape Design and Plants Selection, Drainage Design) 2. Recruitment of Skilled Builder, Construction Training, and Construction Process were done simultaneously with assistance of Consultants 3. Community Empowerment Monitoring was conducted by other Consultant to ensure the quality of the work. 4. Transfer of Infrastructure to the Local Government and Local Communities; and Stakeholders’ Partnership Discussion were conducted in December. Figure 25. The Local Organisation for SUSIP Implementation in Cirendeu [37]Source: PT. Rifa Bestari, Final Presentation for Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP) SF-07 in Cirendeu, Ciputat, South Tangerang Municipality, Banten Province, Jakarta Metro Region, Republic of Indonesia. The Cirendeu program was found ideal as the benchmark for all SUSIP implementation. Unfortunately, due to tight schedule some processes were conducted simultaneously. With longer time, we believed “More Sustainable” results would be produced.

THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN The Cirendeu Community prepared the CDP with assistance of the consultant. The CDP actually prescribed strategies to be implemented such as: Improving the ecological, economical, social and thermal comfort with development of the Open Space; Maintaining the existing Open Spaces including the Football Field and private open spaces; Development and optimization of Open Space to be a Green Open Space in Football Field School Playground and Office Local roads and small access within the informal settlement Parking area House front and back yard; Creating community activities in the Open Space. The CDP was divided in three stages for “More Sustainable” SUSIP Implementation. The first stage was mostly supported by Directorate General of Spatial Planning, Ministry of Public Works. But the second and third stage would be conducted by The Communities and Local Government Administration (Kelurahan) with financial assistance from all Stakeholders. In the First Stage, the CDP covered the Social Economic Aspect and Physical Aspect. The Social – Economic Aspect was to formulate the work program of the Local SUSIP Organisation of Cirendeu, multi-stakeholders partnership proposal and collaborative program with the Community. Meanwhile, the CDP explained the development physical aspect of the Cirendeu Village in 3 zones, such as: Core Zone, Supporting Zone and Transition Zone. Figure 26. Community Development Plan (CDP) Cirendeu in Brief [38]Source: Directorate of Spatial Planning, Public Works Department (2009), Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP) – Executive Presentation, assisted by Green Impact IndonesiaPT. Rifa Bestari, Final Presentation for Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP) SF-07 in Cirendeu, Ciputat, South Tangerang Municipality, Banten Province, Jakarta Metro Region, Republic of Indonesia. In the Core Zone, the CDP prescribed planting all vegetations; paving for Culinary Park & Playing Ground; providing pedestrian path, recharging well, seating for football spectator, water pumps and watering infrastructure; and maintaining infrastructures and plants. In the Supporting Zone, The CDP prescribed the greening of Village Administration Office; setting up Pergola and poly-bag plants in local access road within the informal settlement; greening private premises (self-financed); constructing bio-pores, and maintaining of infrastructures and plants. Thirdly, the CDP prescribed in the Transition Zone the constructing of pedestrian and greening the Jl. SD Cirendeu 4; improving drainage of the Jl. Cirendeu Indah I; greening private premises (self-financed); and maintaining infrastructures and plants. All these programs were conducted by the SUSIP Local Organisation and the Local Community. In the second stage, the Local SUSIP Organisation of Cirendeu would continue the implementation of CDP, dissemination of the CDP to External Communities and improvement the organisation structure, facility and supporting infrastructure of the SUSIP Local Organisation. Lastly, in the third stage, the CDP prescribed the evaluation of usage of the Open Spaces as well as control the unsustainable use to be conducted together with stakeholders. This was to ensure the sustainability of the Open Space.

THE LANDSCAPE AND INFRASTRUCTURE DESIGN PT. Rifa Bestari provided excellent landscape design for Local Community to select before the CDP agreed. This actually showed the positive aspect involving professional consultants in the Community Based Program. Further we would like to highlight their final design and the comparison with the existing condition. The Landscape Design of Cirendeu Open Space was planned with 3 zones as mentioned in CDP, which are: the Core Zone, the Supporting Zone, and the Transition Zone. This was initially determined due to phasing stage and sustainability of SUSIP development. Further several design concept would be presented in the following figures: Figure 27. Design Concept of Cirendeu Open Space (1) [39]Source: PT. Rifa Bestari, (2009) Final Presentation for Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP). Figure 29. Design Concept of Cirendeu Open Space (3) [41]Source: PT. Rifa Bestari, (2009) Final Presentation for Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP). Figure 31. Design Concept of Cirendeu Open Space (5) [43]Source: PT. Rifa Bestari, (2009) Final Presentation for Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP). Figure 33. Design Concept of Cirendeu Open Space (7) [45]Source: PT. Rifa Bestari, (2009) Final Presentation for Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP).

Figure 28. Design Concept of Cirendeu Open Space (2) [40]Source: PT. Rifa Bestari, (2009) Final Presentation for Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP). Figure 30. Design Concept of Cirendeu Open Space (4) [42]Source: PT. Rifa Bestari, (2009) Final Presentation for Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP). Figure 32. Design Concept of Cirendeu Open Space (6) [44]Source: PT. Rifa Bestari, (2009) Final Presentation for Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP). Figure 34. Design Concept of Cirendeu Open Space (8) [46]Source: PT. Rifa Bestari, (2009) Final Presentation for Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP).

Figure 35. Design Concept of Cirendeu Open Space (9) [47]Source: PT. Rifa Bestari, (2009) Final Presentation for Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP). Figure 37. Design Concept of Cirendeu Open Space (11) [49]Source: PT. Rifa Bestari, (2009) Final Presentation for Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP).

Figure 36. Design Concept of Cirendeu Open Space (10) [48]Source: PT. Rifa Bestari, (2009) Final Presentation for Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP). Figure 38. Design Concept of Cirendeu Open Space (12) [50]Source: PT. Rifa Bestari, (2009) Final Presentation for Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP).

Figure 39. Design Concept of Cirendeu Open Space (13) [51]Source: PT. Rifa Bestari, (2009) Final Presentation for Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP).

THE SUSIP’S IMPLEMENTATION The implementation of planting and construction in Cirendeu could be finished not far from the target. It was completed with good construction and landscape work quality. Because of that the Cirendeu Open Space was used for the Public Dissemination of SUSIP in Jakarta Metro Region in March 2010. The construction process also involved at least 200 persons who live nearby the open space. Further the comparison of photos describing the previous conditions, during construction process and in the future are presented below. Figure 40. – Figure 59. Photos of previous conditions, during construction process and in the future are presented below. Photos Before Implementation Process Photos Photos After Implementation It can be concluded that SUSIP in Cirendeu is a “More Sustainable” program. This is clearly seen with the method, participatory approach, quality control as well as maintenance after the program implementation. This model could be replicated in Spatial Improvements of other urban areas.

THE CONCLUSION OF SUSIP’S IMPLEMENTATION IN CIRENDEU It can be concluded from Cirendeu case that improvement of the Open Space is widely supported by the Community because of their needs for space for outdoor activities, greenery improvement within neighbourhood, and flood reduction. The Open Space also could be managed and developed for supporting local economic activities such as in the Culinary Park section. Further, effective process of SUSIP could be achieved with active participation of Central Government, Province Government, Municipality or Regency Government, Local Government as well as Local Communities. On the other hand, more timeframe (approximately 9 months) would be needed for executing “More Sustainable” SUSIP. Hopefully, the SUSIP implementation in Cirendeu could be replicated in other area.

CONCLUSION Generally, there are 6 points of “Lesson Learned” from SUSIP in Cirendeu as well as the whole process of SUSIP. They are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Site Selection Program Introduction Training and Transfer of Knowledge Community Development Involvement of Sectored Agencies, Various Regional and Local Government and Local Communities 6. The “More Sustainable” Program Firstly, for Site Selection, the GIS-based integrated evaluation was suggested to produce an accurate recommendation of SUSIP’s site and the “More Sustainable SUSIP Strategies.” Later, in the local level, the result needs to be discussed by Local Government and Communities to prescribe “More Locally Sustainable Program.” Furthermore, land ownership has become the main factor of successful maintenance of Open Space and infrastructure facilities provided by SUSIP. Therefore, the legal status preferable for SUSIP is the Government’s land or Communities’ land. Program introduction of SUSIP needs to be conducted involving local leaders (formal and informal). This was proven to be the effective way to communicate with and get acceptance from the Communities. The training and transfer of knowledge for SUSIP also could involve the local leaders with related capacity. The approach could be applied with innovative methods such as: in-class and out-class methods. The Community Development in SUSIP was originally conducted to improve the Communities awareness of the importance of Sustainable Spatial Planning. This was translated in the participatory method throughout the SUSIP implementation with existing or new local organization. The women participation was also found as the key successful point of SUSIP, because of increasing awareness level among Indonesian women on the environmental issues. The involvement of Sectored Agencies, Various Regional and Local Government and Local Communities was also found as the important requirement for successful SUSIP. This is because of the higher commitment and awareness of all stakeholders. In the SUSIP’s sustainability, we found that the economic aspect of the Open Space and Green Rehabilitation Program is the key point for the sustainability. The Local Organisation would need economic income for sustaining its activity as well as maintaining the SUSIP infrastructures and greenery. For example, idea of cultivation of productive plants, recreation ticket sales and the affordable football field rental could be utilized for “More Economic Sustainable SUSIP.” Lastly, the involvement of the Local Government and Local Community were found important for maintaining the infrastructure after the SUSIP implementation.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT We would like to express our gratitude to The Directorate of Spatial Planning, Ministry of Public Works, Republic of Indonesia; The Relevant Central Government Offices; The Provincial Governments in Jakarta Metro Region; The Municipalities and Regencies in Jakarta Metro Region; The Advisory team: DR. Ir. Alinda Zein, MSc., Dr. Ir. I.F. Poernomosidhi Poerwo, M.Sc, MCIT. MIHT., Ir. Dodo Juliman, Ir. Suhadi Hadiwinoto, and Drs. Yayat Supriatna MSP.; PT. Rifa Bestari Team Ir. Rasdiman Rasyad, M.Si (Team Leader/ Planner) Drs. Harudin Hartono (Senior Community Based Development Specialist) Ida Rahayu Widowati, ST, MT (Senior Landscape Architect) Ir. Coenraad Hattu (Senior Hydrologist) Hani Andriani, ST (Senior Environmental Engineer) Dipl.Ing. Firmansyah Bachtiar, ST (Senior Landscape Architect) Makhlus Syadat, ST (Environmental Engineer) Gusti Firdauzy Noor, M. Arch (Urban Designer) Ira Puspa Kencana, SP (Landscape Architect) Sudarsono, SP (Community Development Specialist) Arief Ferdiansyah Kembe, ST (Construction Inspector) Dr.Ir. Nizar Nasrullah, M.Agr (Landscape Architect Resource Person) Other SUSIP Consultants The Local Communities and Organisations in 8 SUSIP Locations; The Other Parties that contributed in the SUSIP process such as: Green Impact Indonesia. [1] Ford, Larry R., A Model of Indonesian City Structure, Geographical Review, Vol. 83, No. 4. (Oct., 1993), pp. 374-396., http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=00167428%28199310%2983%3A4%3C374%3AAMOICS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-M Alkatiri, Wardah., Jakarta – Bandung Mega Urban Belt A Tale of a Nation Chasing Economic Growth :Social Change and Multidimensional Crisis in the Heart of Indonesia [2] Directorate of Spatial Planning, Ministry of Public Works(2009), Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP) – Executive Presentation assisted by Green Impact Indonesia [3] Dardak, H. and Poerwo, I.F. Directorate of Spatial Planning, Ministry of Public Works(2007), Dissemination of Act no 26 Year 2007 on Spatial Planning (Undang-Undang No. 26 Tahun 2007 tentang Tata Ruang) [4] Op. Cit.2 [5] Indonesian Statistics Board (Badan Pusat Statistik) (2007), http://www.bps.go.id/index.php [6] The North Jakarta Municipality was later split into North Jakarta Municipality and Seribu Island Regency [7] The Tangerang Regency was later split into South Tangerang Municipality and Tangerang Regency [8] Op. Cit.3 [9] Op. Cit.2 [10] Op. Cit.2 [11] Op. Cit.2 [12] Op. Cit.2 [13] Op. Cit.2 [14] Op. Cit.2 [15] PT. Rifa Bestari, Final Presentation for Sustainable Urban Spatial Improvement Program (SUSIP) SF-07 in Cirendeu, Ciputat, South Tangerang Municipality, Banten Province, Jakarta Metro Region, Republic of Indonesia. [16] Op.cit 15 [17] Ministry of Forestry, Directorate General of Land Rehabilitation and Social Forestry, Office of Catchments Management of Citarum – Ciliwung Rivers (2008), Final Report of Detail Flood Mitigation Plan for Jakarta Metro Region [18] Op. Cit.2 [19] Op. Cit.2 [20] Ministry of Forestry, Directorate General of Land Rehabilitation and Social Forestry, Office of Catchments Management of Citarum – Ciliwung Rivers (2008), Final Report of Detail Flood Mitigation Plan for Jakarta Metro Region [21] Ministry of Forestry, Directorate General of Land Rehabilitation and Social Forestry, Office of Catchments Management of Citarum – Ciliwung Rivers (2008), Final Report of Detail Flood Mitigation Plan for Jakarta Metro Region [22] Op. Cit.2 [23] Op. Cit.2 [24] Op. Cit.2 [25] Op. Cit.2 [26] Op. Cit.2 [27] Op.cit 15 . [28] Op.cit 15 [29] Op.cit 15 [30] Op. Cit.2 [31] Op. Cit.2 [32] Op. Cit.2 [33] Op.cit 15 [34] Op.cit 15 [35] Op.cit 15 [36] Op. Cit.2 [37] Op.cit 15 [38] Op. Cit.2 Op.cit 15 [39] Op.cit 15 [40] Op.cit 15 [41] Op.cit 15 [42] Op.cit 15 [43] Op.cit 15 [44] Op.cit 15 [45] Op.cit 15 [46] Op.cit 15 [47] Op.cit 15 [48] Op.cit 15 [49] Op.cit 15 [50] Op.cit 15 [51] Op.cit 15 Link PDF: http://www.scribd.com/doc/33500553/20100624-SS-Challenges-in-SUSIP Kategori:Desain Arsitektur - Architecture Design, Ekonomi - Economy, Lingkungan Environmental, Sosial - Social, Tata Ruang - Spatial Planning Tag:Development Control and Implementation, Economic Sustainability of the Open Spaces, Improving Green Open Space, Integrated Urban Planning, Stakeholders’ Participation in Spatial Quality Improvement, Sustainable Urban Development

THE CITY OF BANDUNG AND REVIEW OF BANDUNG SPATIAL PLANNING STRATEGIES IN 2005 Maret 25, 2010 gunteitb 2 komentar Written by: 1 Tanuwidjaja, Gunawan 1 MSc. Environmental Management (NUS), S.T. (ITB)

Urban Planner & Researcher, Green Impact Indonesia Integrated Urban, Drainage and Environmental Planning and Design Email: [email protected]

Introduction Bandung or “Paris Van Java” faces tremendous development pressures. The city is congested because of urban sprawling, development of new shopping centres and development of toll road CIPULARANG (CIkampek – PUrwakarta – PadaLARANG) in 2005. We actually wrote this for MSc. Environmental Management, National University of Singapore, for the Environmental Planning Assignment in 2005. But we feel that this paper is important to be shared to its residents and foreigners for better understanding and sympathy for Bandung condition. We also included the Review of Bandung 2013 Spatial Planning Strategies. We understand that currently the new Spatial Plan (Master Plan) of Bandung is still in development process. We hope that this review will give other perspectives to the Municipality and Stakeholders of Bandung to produce more sustainable Spatial Plan or Master Plan. Keywords: Sustainable Urban Development, Master Plan 2013 Bandung, Revitalisation of Bandung, Evaluation for Sustainable Bandung City, Rencana Tata Ruang Wilayah Bandung 2013, Kebijakan Strategis Kota Bandung 2004-2008

The Physical Context Bandung is located in West Java, Indonesia. It is the capital City of West Java Province. Its geographical location is 1070 32’ 38.91” E and 60 55’ 19.94” S, while its altitude is between 675 m and 1’050 m above the sea level. Bandung topography condition can be categorised into two parts. The Northern part is a mountainous terrain with beautiful panoramas, while the Southern part of the City is relatively low with agriculture areas and swamps. Bandung atmospheric condition can be described as wet and humid. The average temperature is 23.6°C, while the monthly rainfall reaches 156.4 mm (average of 15 rainy days in every month). Another distinguish feature of Bandung is its surrounding mountains. Some experts explained that Bandung was a great basin in the prehistoric age. This apparently is a constraint in the development context because of limited area for expansion and higher development costs for developing steep slopes. And these could be observed in the following photos. [i] Figure 1. Beautiful Scenery of North of Bandung With total area of 167.29 km2 , Bandung City is divided into Six Development Districts which are: Bojonegara District Cibeunying District Tegallega District Karees District Ujungberung District Gedebage District. [ii] The division is further presented in following figure. Figure 2. Bandung map, with six Development Districts.[iii]

Social, Political and Institutional Context Bandung was built in 1488 by Pajajaran Kingdom. But it was not fully developed till 1799, when the City was surrendered from VOC to Dutch Government. In 25th May 1811, the City was declared as Bandung Regency capital. Further, the Gemeente Bandoeng was formed in the 21st February 1901. Later the Municipality form was changed to Burgemeester Van Bandoeng in 1st July 1917 and Staadgementee Bandoeng in 1st October 1928. [iv] Figure 3. Bandung in 1930’s Because of the Dutch defeat by the Japanese in Indonesia in World War II, Bandung Municipality was surrendered to the Japanese and named Bandung Si, in 9th March 1942. This Municipality apparently only sustained for 3 years. The independence of Indonesia brought the first National Municipality of Bandung City in 2nd September 1945. Unfortunately during the second Dutch military invasion to Indonesia, the City was occupied by Dutch and became the Capital of Pasundan Country run by Dutch annexes in April 1946. [v] During the stabilization time of Republic of Indonesian the Municipality form was changed to Staadsgemeente Bandoeng in 1st July 1948, Haminte Bandung in 17th January 1949, and finally became Bandung Big City in 15th August 1950. Since that the Municipality was handled by the national government under the Bandung Municipality. The area of Bandung City was extended several times, because of the population and political needs. In 1906 the City was declared as autonomous region with 1’922 Ha areas. This is the first area extension of the City. The second area extensions occurred in in 12th October 1917 to 1’871 Ha. [vi] In 1933, the planning process of Bandung City was initiated by Prof, Ir. Thomas Karsten. His plan was prepared for the next 25 years. Because of the plan, Bandung area was extended from 2’871 Ha to 12’758 Ha in order to house 750’000 people in 1955. This plan was later known with “Karsten Plan” and can be seen in the following figure.[vii] Figure 4. Karsten Plan for Bandung, 1933.[viii] The Dutch colonialism was implemented clearly in this plan. The strategy was done by dividing the City for European, Far-East Asian and Native Indonesian residents. Apparently the government was trying to promote segregation and conflicts between these people. Later this policy appears to create slums area and disintegration in the City systems. Because of Dutch defeat, the Karsten Plan was only partially implemented in the City, mostly in the Northern Bandung. Bandung City area was later expanded by the Japanese authority in 1942-1945 reaching to 5’413 Ha. Under the Pasundan Country in 1949 the City was expanded further to 8’098 Ha. Finally in 1987 under The Republic of Indonesia Government Statue number 16, 1987 the administrative area of Bandung City was extended to 16’729.65 Ha. [ix] The Municipality of Bandung City now is organized according sub-districts division and lower level of people associations. The Bandung City is divided by: 6 Development Districts (Wilayah Pengembangan) 26 Sub-Districts (Kecamatan), led by a Sub-District Head (Camat) 139 Villages (Kelurahan), led by a Village Chief (Lurah) 1’500 Community Associations (Rukun Warga), led by a Leader of Community Association (Ketua RW) 9’277 Neighbourhood Associations (Rukun Tetangga), led by a Leader of Neighbourhood Association (Ketua RT). [x] The problems of lack of funding, lack of human resources, lack of supporting tools are happening in the Bandung Municipality. According to the research which conducted in 2001, numbers of officers with good related backgrounds in the government agencies are very small. For example in the City Planning Agency (Dinas Tata Kota) number of officers with architect or urban designer background is only 10% compared to officers with legal backgrounds. Apparently this has caused disintegrations between the Master Plan, the development control and infrastructure provisions.[xi] According to 2003 National Economic Census the population of Bandung has reached 2’228’268 people (with 1’113’267 women and 1’115’001 men). The average population density of Bandung is 13’367 people/ km2 , with the highest population density in Bojongloa Kaler Sub-district 38’149 people/ km2 .[xii] The population distribution of Bandung City by area is presented in following tables and figures. Apparently some over populated areas in the City possess social and environmental problems. Table 1. Districts’ names, areas, and population numbers and densities in Bandung City 2003.[xiii] Figure 5. Population Densities in Bandung, 2000.[xiv] Bandung people education level can be considered normal. Only 9.33% do not receive education, 82.09% has finished primary and secondary education. 8.30% population hold degrees from 1 Year-Diploma to Bachelor Degree, while 0.29% of the people hold Master and Doctoral Degrees.[xv] This is the highest education rate in the province, but still there are residents’ illiteracy problems. The unemployment problem in Bandung also has been highlighted by some experts. For example it is reported 27’500 people are unemployed because of companies closing down and lack of job creations. This is a tendency of unsustainable social and economic development in the city. [xvi] In 2003 Economic Census the poor people number has reached 34.34% of total population. The poverty problems are very clear and have created a lot of social problems such as criminalities, slum areas, and illegal street-hawker as described in the following photos. While the family economic status distributions and criminalities figures in Bandung 2003 are described in the following table. Figure 6. Aerial View of Over-populated Area and Substandard Housing. [xvii] Figure 7. Illegal Street-hawkers were Obstructing Pedestrians.[xviii] Table 2. Poor family distributions in Bandung City 2003.[xix] Table 3. Criminalities figures in Bandung City, 2003.[xx] The number of health facilities in Bandung actually is enough to cater the need of Bandung populations, although ideally it should be increased. The real problem is actually the need of affordable healthcares. Because of increase of healthcare service, more and more people actually need the affordable ones.

Economic Context The main economic activities of the City are trading and manufacturing industry especially textile and garment. The textile industry started emerging in the City in 1970, while the other economic activities are services industry especially in education and tourism started to emerge 1980. The agriculture activities in Bandung had been reduced since 1970, because a lot of land had been converted from agricultural use to industrial estate and housing. This situation tends to create unsustainable food production, although food supplies are still available in adjacent agricultural area (especially Lembang, North of Bandung). [xxi] The total number of industries in Bandung, between 1998 and 2003, seems not to increase much. The data presented in Table …shows that between 1998 and 2000, number of industries was increasing. It reached the peak in 2000 with 581 industries, but after that it decreased. I believed this phenomenon is happening because of increase of oil cost, and greater competition with China and India emerging industries. All types of industries and their distribution in Bandung are presented in the following tables. And they showed that there is no differentiation of industrial pollution. Table 4. Total number of large and medium industry establishments and absorbed manpower by them in Bandung, 1998 – 2003. [xxii] Table 5a.New Industrial Classification (Klasifikasi Lapangan Usaha Industri / KLUI).[xxiii] Table 5b. Industry classifications and distribution in Bandung City 2003.[xxiv] Table 5c. Industry classifications and distribution in Bandung City 2003.[xxv] Table 5d. Industry classifications and distribution in Bandung City 2003.[xxvi] Table 5e. Industry classifications and distribution in Bandung City 2003.[xxvii] We can found approximately 300 textile industries in Bandung. The industries were concentrated in 3 areas: Eastern area along Cileunyi – Cicalengka Road; Central area along Mohamad Toha Road, Dayeuhkolot Area and Majalaya; and Western area around Nanjung and Padalarang. Another industrial centre can be found in Leuwigajah, Cimahi. Some other textile industries can be found spreading in the southern part of Bandung.[xxviii] The recent development of textile industries showed that almost 70% of industries were closed down in 2005 because of reasons mentioned above. This seems to bring negative impact to economic development in Bandung.[xxix] Another important industry in Bandung is the PT Dirgantara Indonesia. It is a high-tech aircraft company with total employees of 15’801 people, and 2’900 engineers.[xxx] After 18 years the company decided to reduce 30’000 of the employees because of decreasing of aircraft demand and mismanagement. This apparently affected the economic situation and created more unemployment. Other economic sector that makes a lot of contribution is the education. Some nationally recognised university such as Bandung Institute of Technology (ITB), Padjajaran University (UNPAD) and Parahyangan Catholic University (UNPAR) apparently had encouraged numbers of private universities emerged in Bandung. All of education institutions later created demands for supporting economic activities such as: food centres, accommodation, stationery stores, book stores and markets, internet shops, etc. Actually these activities support most of City residents. It was recorded there are 5 government and 66 private tertiary education institutions presence in Bandung, 2005. The factory outlets, delicious foods and beautiful sceneries are three attracting factors for tourists coming to Bandung. This has generated great profits to these industries. On the other hand, negative impacts caused are severe weekend traffic jams. Because of new toll road built from Jakarta to Bandung, every weekend now more that 12’000 vehicles jam Bandung roads and create traffic congestions. The traffic jams sometimes can progress from 12 AM to 20 PM. Figure 8. The Traffic Congestions in Bandung [xxxi]

Environmental Context The needs of 2’228’268 population in Bandung for good public sanitation are not easy to handle, because there are public services network disintegrations in existing urban structure. For example until now there are slums areas without access to clean water, solid waste collection and sewage collection. The phenomenon actually exists in most developing countries. The main reason is the illegal status of land ownerships, lack of funding and inefficiency in the Municipality and Agencies. In the case of solid waste collections only 70% of solid waste produced in Bandung can be transported to the final disposal dumping site.[xxxii] The rests will pollute the river, the gardens, empty lands and public spaces. It is reported that 41.7% of Citarum River, that crosses some areas of Bandung, has been polluted.[xxxiii] Apparently this water pollution is also caused by direct sewage discharge from households. In 1997, the household percentage served by sewerage system was only 32.41 %. This is the example of unsustainable waste management practice in developing cities. The lack of adequate final solid waste treatment is the main problem for waste management. The solid waste collapse in Leuwigajah (the largest open dumping site) in the early 2001 that killed around 100 people actually caused the closing of the dumpsite. This occurred because the mismanagement of Public Sanitation Company (PD Kebersihan). The company did not follow the correct landfill method; they just did an open dumping method. Other problems derived from this operation are heavy metal land contaminations, water contaminations, odour pollutions and infectious disease spreads. All of these phenomena show the need of a paradigm shift in Bandung solid waste management. Figure 9. The Solid Waste that could not be transported and The Garbage Landslide in Leuwigajah Open Dumping Site, Bandung City.[xxxiv] Another Bandung environment related problem is annual flooding. Because of the rapid developments in Bandung, especially in the Northern area which are groundwater recharge areas, the flooding problems become annual event in the Southern parts of Bandung. The other cause of this is littering problem in the river. The solid waste accumulation in river apparently also caused many local flooding. Apparently to change people attitude we need more time and efforts to educate them. [xxxv] Figure 10. The Flood Prone Areas and River Improvement Program in Bandung.[xxxvi] Figure 11. The Flood Condition [xxxvii] The air pollution problems also are happening in Bandung, because of over-population of private cars and motorcycles. This is a very good example of unsustainable transportation practices. It is reported that Pb, CO, NOx, SOx, and suspended solids pollutant level in Bandung has reached dangerous level for human.[xxxviii] Other sources of air pollutant are factories, households and solid waste incinerations.

Existing Spatial Planning Strategies Bandung Municipality actually has identified the some of the problems above in two government plans. These plans had stated new strategies for achieving sustainable development. These documents are: Strategic Plan of Bandung City 2004 – 2008, and Bandung Master Plan 2013.

Strategic Plan of Bandung City 2004-2008 Strategic Plan of Bandung City has identified some strategic issues to be prioritised in the 5years development program. The strategic development issues are: [xxxix] 1. Human Resources Development Improving in human resources (public and government agents) Improving of education institutions in the City 1. Economic Development Improving of community economy based on local potent and equal opportunity Creating interesting investment opportunity to promote job opportunities Reducing poverty 1. Social – Cultural Development Creating social cohesion in the community Improving community participation in every development processes Utilising total community potential Controlling urbanisation 1. Urban Planning Providing public services for all City residents Providing good infrastructures for new investments especially transportation system Developing Eastern part of the Bandung City Controlling flooding problems Maintaining the city infrastructures Reducing groundwater exploitation, with providing enough clean water supplies Reducing pollution to land, water and air Improving the life quality Creating efficient and effective solid waste management 1. Good Governance Improving stakeholders participation in all development processes Promote professionalism, accountability, and responsive government agents Improve government infrastructure for public services Improve coordination between municipalities in Greater Bandung area 1. Regional Budget Improving people participation in budgeting Creating accountable, effective, efficient regional budget system These issues are later translated into Vision, which is “Promoting Bandung to be a clean, wealthy, good and friendly City, based on service industry.” Later every issue also is translated into more detail development programs. My respond for this plan is the time limitation as well as the direct impact of every program to the Urban Development.

Bandung Master Plan 2013 The purpose of this Master Plan was to create land use efficiency, integrate city development and improve urban services effectiveness. It also included some recommendations from 1992 Master Plan. Six Development Districts were proposed according to same geographic location inside the service line of Secondary Urban Centre. The district divisions are described below: Table 6.District, Sub-District and Secondary Urban Centres names. No 1

Name of Development District Bojonagara

2

Cibeunying

3

Tegallega

4

Karees

5

Ujungberung

6

Gedebage

Name of Sub-District

Name of Secondary Urban Centres Setrasari

Andir, Cicendo, Sukasari, Sukajadi Cidadap, Coblong, Bandung Sadang Serang Wetan, Cibeunying Kidul, Cibeunying Kaler, Sumur Bandung Astana Anyar, Bojongloa Kopo Kencana Kidul, Bojongloa Kaler, Babakan Ciparay, Bandung Kulon Regol, Lengkong, Turangga Batununggal, Kiaracondong Cicadas, Arcamanik, Arcamanik Ujungberung, Cibiru, part of Rancasari (Mekar Mulya Village) Bandung Kidul, Margacinta, Margasari the rest of Rancasari

Further this division and Urban Centres are presented in following figure. Figure 12. The Primary and Secondary Urban Centres and Districts served in Bandung.[xl] Master Plan 2013 proposed eight Urban Centres to create better urban services. Two Primary Centres are Asia Afrika Area (existing City Centres) and Gedebage Area. These were proposed to create a duo-centric city and to reduce traffic congestion in City Centres. Six Secondary Centres had been described in previous table. Further some facilities that would be catered in the Urban Centres are presented in next table. Table 7. Facilities proposed in Primary and Secondary Urban Centres No 1 2

3 4 5

6

7

8

Facilities

Primary Urban Centres in Gedebage Areas Education Facilities Tertiary Educations and Library Healthcare Facilities B Class Hospital with 11 health specialist heath treatments Religious Facilities Mosque, etc Social Facilities Multi-Purposed Hall Sport and Recreation Sport Complex with Facilities Stadium, Cinema, Theatre, Public Open Spaces Government Facilities Municipality Offices, Post Office, Military District Office, Religion Office Telecommunication, Electricity, Water Companies, and Fire-fighter Centre Retail Facilities Wet Market, Retail Shops, Shopping Centres, Bank, Offices Transportation Facilities Bus Terminal and Parking Lots

Secondary Urban Centres Academy Institutions and Library Class C hospital

Mosque, etc Multi-Purposed Hall Mini Stadium, Museum, Theatre and Cinema Sub-District Office, Public Service Offices, Post Office, Military Sub-District Office, Religion Office, Sanitation Office, Electric Transformer Post Wet Market, Retail Shops

Transit Terminal and Parking Lots

Land use Plan is also presented in following figure. And this plan actually translated the all development strategies in the Master Plan. Figure 13. Bandung Land Use Plan 2013.[xli] Because of Bandung role as the capital city of West Java Province, some strategic areas also were identified to serve the greater region, which will be presented in the next table. Table 8. Provincial, Regional and Municipal Centres in Bandung Provincial and Regional Centres

Municipal Centres

Government Office for West Java Province in Gedung Sate Area Siliwangi Regional Military Centres (KODAM) PT Dirgantara Indonesia and PT Pindad Husein Sastranegara Airport Kebon Kawung and Kiaracondong Train Station Gedebage Terminal Ir. H Juanda Recreation Park and Forest Commercial Areas in Asia Afrika Road Caringin Grocery Centre

Government Office for Bandung Municipality in Merdeka Road Recreation Park in Gasibu, Tegallega and Punclut Area Tertiary Educations in Ganesha Road, Dipati Ukur Road and Surapati Road.

These locations further are presented in following figure Figure 14. Provincial, Regional and Municipal Centres in Bandung. [xlii] In respond to accessibility issue of the City, a transportation system was proposed. It includes Primary Artery, Secondary Artery, Primary Collector and Secondary Collector and Local Roads. The proposed plan consists of: Internal toll roads in Northern and Eastern area of Bandung Proposed railway road Improvement of existing railway station to become a regional station Build an integrated terminal in Gedebage that will cater public transport, container and train station Build a new bus terminal in the City perimeter Utilise Husein Sastranegara Airport until new airport area is build. This transportation plans are presented in following figure. . Figure 15. Road Structures Plan of Bandung. [xliii] Figure 16. Proposed Toll-Road Structures Plan of Bandung. [xliv] The Master Plan 2013 proposed four land-use strategies, which prescribe conservation area, development area, urban facilities, population density and carrying capacity of the City. First, conservation areas are selected to preserve the aquifer recharge, biodiversity in forest and park area in the city and historical buildings. This is further translated in the Conservation Plan in table and figure below. Table 9. Detail Classification of Conservation Strategy Conservation Area Type Detail Location Groundwater Recharge Area Potential forest area for Northern of Bandung groundwater recharge Green Open Spaces Riparian and lake areasArea All over the City surrounding to water springs Setback of the railway road Area underneath of high voltage grid Setback of toll road City Park and funeral Nature Reserve

Recreation parkBiodiversity conservation area Heritage Conservation Areas Building and areas that hold an important historical and cultural value of Bandung

Cidadap Sub-district

Hazardous Areas

Alun-alun, Asia Afrika, Braga, Cikapundung, Kelenteng, Pasar Baru, Oto Iskandardinata, ABC, Pecinan, Sumatra, Jawa, Aceh, Bali, Gudang Utara, etc Northern of Bandung

Potential area for natural disasters, that is earthquake

Figure 17. Conservation Plan for Bandung. [xlv] Development areas and development strategies are divided in several land use types which are: Housing, Government Facility, Trade, Service Industry, Education, Healthcare, Industry and Warehouse, Tourism and Recreation, Military. For 2013, Bandung would prescribe housing in the 60% of the city area to cater 2’944’860 people. Two strategies were proposed are horizontal and vertical developments. Three housing densities are further suggested comprise high, medium and low density. High density proposed were the low cost and exclusive apartments in Tamansari, Andir, Braga, Cigondewah, Cicadas and Kiaracondong, on the Municipality-owned land. The medium density would be proposed in Tegallega, Karees, Gedebage. Lastly the low density would be proposed in Bojonegara, Cibeunying, and Ujungberung. Realising more limited land resources in Bandung, the Municipality found that horizontal developments were not possible anymore. Other programs proposed were the urban renewal of the slums area and the new housing developments in Gedebage. The new residential area would comprise 3000 empty parcels and 1000 utilised parcels. A lot of Government Agencies Centres that exists in Bandung, such as PT Dirgantara Indonesia, PT INTI, PT POS, etc including Provincial Government were proposed to stay in the City. For trade, Master Plan proposed to develop traditional market and shopping mall in Secondary Urban Centres to reduce the congestion to the Primary Centres. Some detail development will include: Redevelopment of traditional markets areas such as Andir, Kiaracondong, etc Relocation of land-use-inconsistent markets such as Suci, Kordon, Balubur, Simpang, Gegerkalong, Palasari, Sukajadi Redevelopment of wholesaler market in Caringin and Gedebage The municipality realised the overcrowding of shopping centres and factory outlet in Bandung. These developments needed to be controlled and redirected to the Eastern of Bandung, Another mall-related problem is the traffic congestions along the artery and collector roads, while factory outlet developments also need corrections because of housing land use violations. Last problem to be control is the illegal street-hawker (PKL). This problem was proposed to be solved with proposing some designated areas for catering the street-hawker. Relating to the Service Industry, the Plan proposed to develop this industry in Primary and Secondary Urban Centres, especially in Eastern part of the City. On the other hand, it was realised the need to reduce its intensity in Western Bandung. For Education, the Master Plan suggested to control the development of education institutions and relocate them to Eastern Bandung, Jatinangor Area. Regarding Healthcare developments, the Master Plan proposed improvement of Hasan Sadikin Hospital to become an International-recognised Teaching Hospital. Other similar prescription because of too intensified healthcare developments in Western was to regulate healthcares in Western part and improve more healthcares in Eastern part. For Industries and Warehouses developments, it was realised that Bandung limited capacity for is catering the polluting and water-demanding industries, so they were proposed to be phased out. Industries that are proposed later to replace them are small-scale environmentalfriendly industries, while the warehouses are suggested to be relocated to the Eastern area of the City. In order to develop tourism and recreation area, some strategies were prescribed in the plan, which are: Preserve existing cultural tourism and recreation areas Develop new shopping mall and cultural tourism area in Eastern Bandung Control the development of negative tourism such as bar, pub, massage, karaoke, etc. Lastly for land use, The Military areas in the city were only proposed to be preserved and secured. Building Densities also were also proposed in the Master Plan. These densities further are presented in table below. Table 10. The Building Density Strategies No Land Use Type 1 Conservation Area

Max Built Area Max Plot Ratio Road Class Road Class Details ArteryCollectorLocalArteryCollectorLocal Only for important 2% 2% 2% 0 0.02 0 utilities

2 Development Area High Rise

25% 20%

15% 4

2.4

1.5

Midde Rise

25% 25%

25% 1.3

1.25

1.3

60% 70%

80% 1.2

1.4

1.6

Low Rise – 50% 60% Middle Density

60% 1.2

1.2

1.2

Low Rise – Low Density

40% 50%

60% 1.2

1.2

1.2

Northern Bandung

20% 20%

20% 0.6

0.6

0.4

Area > 10’000 25% 40% m2

50% 2

1.6

1.5

Area > 5’000 m2

50% 2

1.6

1.5

Area from 1’001 50% 50% to 5’000 m2

50% 1.5

1.5

1.2

Area from 200 (min) to 1’000 60% 60% m2

60% 1.2

1.2

1.2

Low Rise

a Housing

b Service

c

Low Rise – High Density

25% 40%

Primary Urban 50% 50% Centres

50% 4

3

2

Secondary 50% 50% Urban Centres

50% 3

2.5

2

Government Offices, Area < 5’000 m2

Wholesaler

40% 50%

50% 1.6

1.5

1.2

30% x

x

x

x

20

d Trade

Shopping Mall 50% Shopping Centre50% Single Shop 50% Primary Urban 70% Centres Secondary 70% Urban Centres Large-scale 40% Industry Middle-scale 40% e IndustrialIndustry Small-scale Industry House Industry

f

Education

g Public Facilities

60% 60% 60%

x 1.5 x 1.5 60% 1

0.9 0.9 0.9

x x 0.6

70%

70% 2.8

2.1

1.4

70%

70% 2.8

2.1

1.4

x

x

1.2

x

x

40%

x

1.2

0.8

x

60%

60%

1.2

1.2

60%

60%

1.2

1.2

50% 50%

x

2

1

x

50% 50%

60% 1

1

0.6

Building with more than 8 floors (apartment) Building with 4 to 8 floors (low income flats) Building Height Limit is 45% from road axes The construction legal status must be preceded by design review and impact assessments Building with 3 floors maximum Building density more than 40 unit/Ha and population density more than 200 people/Ha Building density between 15 and 40 unit/Ha and population density below 200 people/Ha Building density less than 15 unit/Ha and average population density 75 people/Ha Building density less than 10 unit/Ha and average population density 50 people/Ha The construction legal status must be preceded by design review and impact assessments The facilities provided must follow technical standard especially parking lots Building Height Limit is 45% from road axes

The facilities provided must follow technical standard especially parking lots

The facilities provided must follow technical standard especially parking lots The construction legal status must be preceded by design review and impact assessments The facilities provided must follow technical standard especially parking lots Building Height Limit is 45% from road axes

The construction legal status must be preceded by design review and impact assessments The construction legal status must be preceded by design review and impact assessments The facilities provided must follow technical standard especially parking lots Building Height Limit is 45% from road axes The construction legal status must be preceded by design review and impact assessments The facilities provided must follow technical standard especially parking lots Building Height Limit is 45% from road axes

Other plans proposed in Master Plan 2013 are: Clean Water Supply Sewage Water System and Treatment Solid Waste System and Treatment Fire-fighting Station Energy and Telecommunication Public Facilities Further the first-three plans are explained in following figures. Figure 18. Clean Water Supply Plan for Bandung. [xlvi] Figure 19. Sewage Water Treatment Plan for Bandung. [xlvii] Figure 20. Solid WasteTreatment Plan for Bandung. [xlviii]

Analysis of Spatial Planning Strategies The Municipality of Bandung had realised many sustainable urban development strategies in the Strategic Plan of Bandung City and Master Plan 2013. One of the strategies was to develop natural and historical conservation plan. Unfortunately, due to current legal, social, economic as well as technical problems, many of the strategies could not be implemented entirely. For example, the Master Plan 2013 was failed to realise the carrying capacity of Bandung (natural and social). Due to rapid urbanisation, the Master Plan 2013 had to increase the population capacity of Bandung from 750’000 persons (“Karsten Plan”) to 3 million persons. I am afraid that this will create further unsustainable problems in Bandung such as floods, landslides, groundwater deficiencies, etc. [xlix] The Master Plan 2013 also tried to implement some sustainable urban development strategies such as proposing Primary and Secondary Urban Centres. On the other hand, for the metropolitan city with approximately 3 million population (in 2005), the Master Plan did not prescribe a clear mass transportation system. Furthermore, the sustainable traffic control method was not prescribed in the Master Plan also. I believe that this would worsen the traffic problems. Further, the integrated land use and transportation planning approach in Master Plan 2013 were failed to be implemented due to land and development speculation by private sectors. The current commercials are mostly designated mostly in the city centres, while affordable housings are located in the suburban area. The separation actually will decrease accessibility, city vibrant life and livelihood issues. And this would worsen the city traffic jams. Observing the present condition of the City, I believe that 2013 Master Plan had failed to realise the legal social and technical problems. Major private land ownership and limited space in the city had prohibited the Master Plan to be implemented. Some social issues like affordable housing for low income people were not proposed to be solved with integrated participatory approach although high density living strategy was already considered. While job creations pan and slum areas redevelopments also were not clearly revealed in the plan. The Conservation Plan actually had recognised the important historical and nature areas in Bandung. Unfortunately, the natural conservation area in the North of Bandung could not be implemented due to legal issues with landowner and Central Government. Because increasing land value and less stringent development control in the area. Furthermore, this has increased the run-off of the Northern Bandung area, causing potential floods in the Southern Bandung. Integrated water management and solid waste management were not prescribed in the Master Plan. Although, the implementation and improvement of existing practice still need more time. Some problems also exists such as solid waste sorting, sewage treatment plant were not prioritised to be done. Regarding the industries, the recognition of the need of development of environmental friendly industries was mentioned in the Plan. Although in the reality, the polluting industries were not effectively regulated yet. In conclusion, because of existing conditions of urban development in Bandung, the Municipality of Bandung had tried its best effort in prescribing the sustainable urban development strategies in the Master Plan 2013. Unfortunately it is very difficult to

implement this because of low public acceptance, less stringent development control as well as legal and financial limitations. Still, I hope that this paper would give some insights input to the Municipality of Bandung, [i] http://www.bappeda-bandung.go.id/ [ii] Ibid. [iii] Planning Agency Bandung Municipality, Bandung Master Plan 2013 [iv] Op.cit.1 [v] Op.cit.1 [vi] Op.cit.1 [vii] Op.cit.1 [viii] http://www.geocities.com/bandungcity/ [ix] Op.cit.1 [x] Op.cit.1 [xi] Report of Bandung City Forum on Housing Problem, 25th August 2001, Architecture Department ITB and COMBINE [xii] Op.cit.1 [xiii] Statistics Agency Bandung City, Economic Census 2003 [xiv] Op.cit.1 [xv] Op.cit.1 [xvi] http://www.urbanpoor.or.id/content/view/176/48/ Kompas Jawa Barat 17/11/05 [xvii] http://www.schatten.info/images/show/indonesia2004/show-bandung-01.html http://www.flickr.com [xviii] http://www.pikiran-rakyat.com [xix] Family Planning Coordination Board, Bandung City, 2003 [xx] Bandung City Police Headquarters (Polwiltabes Bandung), Bandung City, 2003 [xxi] Op.cit.1 [xxii] Op.cit.13 [xxiii] Op.cit.13 [xxiv] Op.cit.13 [xxv] Op.cit.13 [xxvi] Op.cit.13 [xxvii] Op.cit.13 [xxviii] http://www.tekmira.esdm.go.id/publikasi/ TriswanSuseno/TranportasiBatubara.doc [xxix] http://www.suarakarya-online.com/news.html?id=138470 [xxx] http://www.dprin.go.id/links/pt_iptn/inbrief.htm [xxxi] http://www.flickr.com [xxxii] Report of Bandung City Forum on Solid Waste Problem, 1st February 2002, ITB, PPLH and COMBINE [xxxiii] http://www.kompas.com/gayahidup/news/0404/28/210224.htm [xxxiv] Private Collection, Tanuwidjaja Gunawan http://www.pikiran-rakyat.com [xxxv] http://www.adrc.or.jp/publications/Cooperative_projects/Indonesia/pdf/Apc%20Makalah%20Pak%20Arief%20Ilyas.pdf http://webdomino1.oecd.org/comnet/agr/landconserv.nsf/viewHtml/index/$FILE/Fahmuddin.PDF http://www.kompas.com/kompas-cetak/0502/24/ekonomi/1577753.htm [xxxvi] Op.cit.3 [xxxvii] Op.cit.31 [xxxviii] http://www.kompas.com/kesehatan/news/0506/18/111004.htm [xxxix] Op.cit.1 [xl] Op.cit.3 [xli] Op.cit.3 [xlii] Op.cit.3 [xliii] Op.cit.3 [xliv] Op.cit.3 [xlv] Op.cit.3 [xlvi] Op.cit.3 [xlvii] Op.cit.3 [xlviii] Op.cit.3 [xlix] Op.cit.1

Download PDF in: http://www.scribd.com/doc/28872420/The-City-of-Bandung-and-Review-of-BandungSpatial-Planning-Strategies-in-2005 Kategori:Desain Arsitektur - Architecture Design, Lingkungan - Environmental, Sosial Social, Tata Ruang - Spatial Planning Tag:Evaluation for Sustainable Bandung City, Kebijakan Strategis Kota Bandung 2004-2008, Master Plan 2013 Bandung, Rencana Tata Ruang Wilayah Bandung 2013, Revitalisation of Bandung, Sustainable Urban Development

PENGEMBANGAN PERANGKAT EVALUASI LAHAN (ALiT) UNTUK NEGARA-NEGARA BERKEMBANG, DENGAN STUDI KASUS PULAU BINTAN, INDONESIA Maret 8, 2010 gunteitb Tinggalkan komentar Ditulis Oleh: Oleh: Gunawan Tanuwidjaja MSc. Environmental Management (NUS), S.T. (ITB) Green Impact Indonesia Integrated Urban, Drainage and Environmental Planning and Design Email: [email protected] Pendahuluan Dunia saat ini sedang mengalami persoalan lingkungan hidup yang besar mencakup ledakan jumlah penduduk, habisnya SDA, perubahan iklim global, kepunahan tumbuhan dan hewan, kerusakan habitat, peningkatan polusi dan kemiskinan. Masalah – masalah tsb dipercaya oleh berbagai ahli ditimbulkan oleh pembangunan yang tidak berkelanjutan, salah satunya dalam pengembangan lahan (Miller, 2003, hlm.1-3). Permasalahan nyata yang dirasakan oleh pemerintah dan masyarakat Indonesia adalah terjadinya bencana alam banjir, longsor, letusan gunung berapi, gempa bumi, dan tsunami. Secara statistik, bencana alam di seluruh Indonesia tahun 2005 – 2006 mencatat 330 bencana banjir dengan 528 korban jiwa, 69 bencana tanah longsor dengan 127 korban jiwa, 7 bencana letusan gunung berapi, 241 gempa bumi dengan 5839 korban jiwa, dan 13 bencana i

tsunami dengan 653 korban jiwa. Walaupun bencana tersebut bukan sepenuhnya ditimbulkan oleh ulah manusia tetapi kasus tersebut dapat menunjukkan betapa selama ini pengembangan lahan dilakukan dengan tidak mengikutsertakan evaluasi lahan yang integratif. Penerapan evaluasi lahan di kebanyakan negara-negara berkembang sulit dilakukan karena mahalnya biaya, serta kurangnya tenaga ahli, dan peralatan. Fenomena ini mendorong saya mengembangkan perangkat evaluasi lahan adaptif dalam konteks tersebut. Untuk memudahkan konteks penerapannya dan pengembangan perangkat tersebut, daerah Bintan Buyu, yang terletak di Provinsi Kepulauan Riau, Indonesia dipilih sebagai studi kasus. Sebagai latar belakang, pada tahun 2003 daerah ini ditentukan oleh DPRD Kabupaten Bintan (saat itu Kabupaten Kepulauan Riau) sebagai ibukota baru pengganti Kota Tanjung Pinang. Pada tahun 2004 BAPPEDA Kabupaten Bintan (Kepulauan Riau) dan PT Metaforma menyusun sebuah Master Plan baru untuk daerah tersebut (Master Plan Bandar Seri Bintan 2004). Karena beberapa kelemahan dari rekomendasi tsb, BAPPEDA memutuskan untuk menyusun kembali rencana tsb. Diharapkan hasil penelitian ini dapat bahan pertimbangan dalam pembuatan master plan yang baru. Hasil Penelitian Penelitian menghasilkan sebuah perangkat evaluasi lahan yang disebut ALiT (Adaptive Landscape Evaluation Tool). Perangkat ini dibentuk dari telaah berbagai metode evaluasi lahan sehingga dapat memberikan beberapa kelebihan yaitu proses penentuan kriteria evaluasi yang seimbang, penggunaan database GIS, survey cara cepat, konsultasi dengan ahli dari berbagai disiplin ilmu dan pelibatan peran serta masyarakat dalam evaluasi akhir. Secara garis besar ada delapan langkah dalam ALiT, yang kemudian digunakan sebagai metode penelitian, yaitu 1 Menentukan tujuan, batasan dan context 2 Penentuan atau pemilihan kriteria evaluasi 3 Pengumpulan data sekunder 4 Menyiapkan database GIS 5 Survey cepat pada daerah-daerah penting 6 Konsultasi dengan para ahli 7 Analisa GIS 8 Evaluasi bersama dengan stakeholder Seperti perangkat atau metode evaluasi lahan yang lain tujuan proses ini haruslah didefinisikan lebih dahulu untuk mengarahkan proses berikutnya. Sebagai contoh tujuan dari evaluasi Bintan Buyu ialah untuk menentukan daerah yang paling layak untuk dibangun dan melindungi kondisi alam dari dampak lingkungan yang ada. Pada tahap kedua, penulis menyarankan untuk membatasi kriteria yang akan digunakan. Tahap ini sesungguhnya akan menghemat waktu dan biaya proses. Kriteria tersebut di atas adalah kriteria terpenting (faktor terpenting) terhadap pembangunan. Kriteria tersebut juga menggambarkan dampak terbesar dari pembangunan yang akan dihadapi oleh kondisi lingkungan sekitarnya. Ada 16 kriteria utama yang disarankan metode ini yang akan disajikan pada Appendix makalah ini. Dalam kasus Bintan Buyu ditemui ada beberapa faktor atau kriteria evaluasi yang penting yaitu biologi, ketinggian dan kemiringan lahan, potensi banjir, dan aksesibilitas lahan. Sementara itu terdapat beberapa data yang tidak diikutsertakan karena kurang relevan terhadap studi seperti fenomena kelautan dan jarak dari berbagai kota besar dalam propinsi atau pusat regional. Selain itu ditemukan data yang tidak tersedia seperti luas ekotipe, kepemilikan lahan, dan tingkat kriminalitas. Pengumpulan data sekunder tetap dilakukan dengan wawancara dan pengumpulan data dari stakeholder penting (terutama instansi pemerintah). Sedangkan untuk memudahkan evaluasi lahan berikutnya disarankan untuk menggunakan GIS (dalam hal ini ArcView GIS 3.1) dalam penyusunan database data tersebut. Hal ini juga telah diterapkan dalam kasus di atas. Untuk melakukan validasi terhadap data sekunder, saya mengusulkan dilakukannya survey cara cepat. Tujuan penggunaan metode ini ialah untuk menghemat waktu, tenaga dan biaya. Survey tersebut dapat dilakukan dengan menggunakan peta transparan (versi sederhana dari McHarg 1998), dokumentasi foto dan video, GPS serta menggunakan tabel sederhana. Tabel sederhana yang digunakan dapat mencatat tipe ekosistem, nama spesies tumbuhan dan binatang, tata guna lahan, keadan air tanah, koordinat GPS dan jarak dari titik tertentu). Untuk mendapatkan temuan yang seimbang, survey disarankan dilakukan dengan bantuan beberapa tenaga ahli (ahli biologi, ahli teknik sipil, perencana, dll). Selanjutnya perlu dilakukan juga pendekatan multi-disiplin dengan konsultasi dengan tim ahli. Hal ini dilakukan dengan cara melakukan konsultasi dengan para ahli dari berbagai disiplin ilmu untuk menentukan hubungan antara pengaruh dan nilai skor yang digunakan untuk evaluasi. Hal ini bertujuan untuk memberikan rekomendasi yang lebih seimbang dan mengurangi peluang dampak lingkungan dari pembangunan. Tahap pengolahan data dan analisa kembali dilakukan dengan menggunakan GIS (Arc Views GIS 3.1). Untuk mengurangi kerancuan dari hasil evaluasi penulis memilih untuk mengklasifikasikan skor akhir evaluasi ke dalam tiga kelompok, yaitu kriteria lingkungan, kriteria alam yang lain dan kriteria sosial ekonomi. Analisis dilakukan dengan memberikan nilai pada setiap sifat dan tata guna lahan. Kemudian memilahnya untuk dijadikan rekomendasi menjadi tiga bagian, yaitu daerah yang tidak layak untuk pembangunan, daerah yang layak untuk pembangunan dengan syarat-syarat tertentu dan daerah yang paling layak untuk dijadikan daerah pembangunan. Seharusnya dilakukan pula tahap pelibatan seluruh stakeholders dalam menentukan tata guna lahan selanjutnya. Hal ini bertujuan untuk menghasilkan rasa kepemilikan yang lebih tinggi dari semua pihak, mengakomodasi kepentingan seluruh pihak seoptimal mungkin dan mengurangi konflik di masa depan. Proses partisipasi masyarakat ini telah dikenal di Indonesia pada kawasan lain seperti Kampung Cibangkong (Bandung), Kampung Code (Jogja) dan lain-lain. Temuan dan Pembahasan Bintan Buyu telah mengalami degradasi lingkungan akibat dari pengembangan pertanian, permukiman dan pertambangan. Hampir semua tipe ekosistem yang ada telah mengalami fragmentasi. Walau demikian ditemukan beberapa daerah nilai ekologi yang baik seperti terumbu karang, hutan bakau dan hutan rawa air tawar yang perlu dilestarikan. Sebaliknya ditemukan daerah -daerah yang mengalami kerusakan ekologi dari level ringan sampai berat meliputi hutan sekunder, pertanian dan pertambangan. Bintan Buyu terletak di ketinggian 0 sampai 255 diatas permukaan laut dengan Gunung Bintan sebagai titik tertinggi. Gunung ini berfungsi sebagai daerah tangkapan air dan termasuk salah satu tempat yang menjadi habitat alam. Keadaan lerengnya bervariasi antara 0 sampai 45 persen. Sedangkan beberapa bagian dari Bintan Buyu, terutama di tengah dan selatan merupakan daerah berawa dengan keadaan ekolologi yang masih baik. Bintan Buyu mengandalkan tiga sungai utama sebagai daerah tangkapan air dan sumber air bersih, yaitu Sungai Bintan, sungai Kangboi dan sungai Anculai. Secara demographi Bintan Buyu mempunyai jumlah penduduk 2065 tercatat sejak April 2006 dengan pertambahan penduduk 0,88%. Secara umum penduduk Bintan Buyu bekerja sebagai petani dan nelayan. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa daerah ini sesungguhnya kurang memiliki potensi untuk dikembangkan sebagai ibukota karena tidak memiliki aktivitas ekonomi pendukung yang memadai. Investasi dari pemerintah dan swasta diperlukan untuk menunjang pembangunannya Selain iti juga saat ini aksesibilitas merupakan salah satu kendala pengembangan kawasan ini. Hanya ditemukan alat transportasi antar daereh berupa bus, mobil pribadi dan sepeda motor pribadi. Sedangkan ditemukan feri dan alat transportasi umum kurang menjangkau kawasan ini. Sebuah sumber pencemaran utama di kawasan Bintan Buyu adalah kegiata pertambangan. Limbah dari proses penambangan secara umum dilaporkan tidak diolah secara baik. Hal ini bisa menjadi ancaman bagi lingkungan dan mungkin mencemari sumber air bersih untuk daerah Bintan dan sekitarnya. Kesimpulan dan Rekomendasi Dengan melihat hasil temuan di lapangan dan hasil analisa, beberapa rekomendasi diberikan kepada pemkot kepulauan Riau, antara lain adalah: Untuk membangun ibukota di daerah-daerah di kawasan utara Bintan Buyu yang nilai ekologinya rendah, yaitu daerah yang hanya mencakup pertanian, padang dan lahan terbuka. Sedang daerah-daerah lain, yang nilai ekologinya masih tinggi, seperti didaerah tengah dan selatan, bisa dijadikan daerah wisata alam atau daerah rekreasi alam bagi penduduk kota, tentu saja tanpa merusak keadaan lingkungan alam yang ada. Direkomendasikan juga untuk tetap melestarikan atau justru mengembangkan konektifitas padang, hutan dan daerah pinggir sungai yang masih terfragmentasi dengan membangun hubungan-hubungan yang baru. Hubungan antar ekologi ini menjadi kunci penting dalam keberhasilan melestarikan daerah-daerah dengan nilai ekologi yang masih tinggi. Pola pengembangan kawasan yang disarankan adalah pola mixed-use dengan bangunan berlantai rendah dan sedang. Disarankan juga untuk menciptakan utilitas umum dan pengolahan limbah yang terdiri dari pengolahan limbah cair, pengolahan limbah padat dan system pembuangan yang terintegrasi. Ancaman kemungkinan terjadinya banjir tetap harus mendapat perhatian yang lebih dalam proses perencanaan. Master plan kawasan ini seharusnya tidak mengganggu keseimbangan air dan ekologi. Beberapa hal lain yang perlu diperhatikan adalah mengurangai aktivitas-aktivitas yang menimbulkan polusi, seperti industri umum, pabrik dan pertambangan. Implementasi kawasan tangkapan air yang baru tidak dapat dilakukan karena polusi yang ada. Untuk itu harus segera dicari sumber air yang lain untuk mengganti sungai Kangboi sebagai bahan baku air minum. Perangkat ALiT adalah merupakan pendekatan optimal dari evaluasi lahan untuk negara berkembang yang mencoba menggunakan pendekatan multidisiplin yang seimbang. Walau penerapan ALiT ini membutuhkan alat, waktu dan upaya tetapi disadari bahwa manfaat proses ini sangat besar karena mengurangi dampak negatif terhadap lingkungan serta dapat menciptakan pembangunan ekonomi yang lebih berkelanjutan. Besar harapannya rekomendasi-rekomendasi ini dapat membantu PEMDA Kabupaten Bintan untuk membangun ibu kota Kabupaten yg lebih baik dengan prinsip “Sustainable Development” untuk Indonesia yang lebih baik. Ucapan Terimakasih Saya ingin mengucapkan terimakasih kepada: Direktur Program MEM (MSc Env Mgt) dan Supervisor saya, Dr. Malone Lee LaiChoo atas bimbingannya dalam studi ini. Seluruh para ahli yang terlibat yaitu: Prof Han Sun Sheng, Dr. Ho Hua Chew, Dr Simon Yanuar Putra, Bapak Benjamin Lee, Ibu Joyce Martha Widjaya, Bapak Alfrendo Satyanaga, dan Ibu Anbarasi Boopal. Seluruh Aparatur Pemerintah Kabupaten Bintan. Banyan Tree Hotels and Resort. Seluruh dosen, rekan mahasiswa dan staff akademik Program MSc Environmental Management (Manajemen Lingkungan NUS) Rekan Mustakim, Arief Dwijanarko and Nedyo Mukti Seluruh warga Bintan khususnya Bapak Bobby, Bapak Udin, Bapak Bun Seng, Bapak Buyung Heri, and Bapak Khaerudin. BIBLIOGRAFI 1. “A strategy for the sub-region”, Coventry-Solihull-Warwickshire Sub-Regional Planning Study Group, Suppl. Rep. No. 5 Countryside (1971). 2. Akus U.T., Sunarya Y., Setiadi H., and Sukrisna (1994), Hydro-geological Map and Report, Tanjung Pinang, 1016, 1017, Scale 1:250.000, Geological Research and Development Centre. 3. Anderson L.T. (2000), Planning the Built Environment, Planner Press, Chicago, USA. 4. Aylward B. (August 2000), Land Use, Hydrological Function and Economic Valuation, UNESCO Symposium/ Workshop Forest-Water-People in the Humid Tropics, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, edited by Bonell M. and Bruijnzel L.A., published by Cambridge University Press. 1. Balmori D. and Benoit G. (eds.) (2003), The LAND Code: Guidelines for Environmentally Sustainable Land Development, Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, USA. 2. BKPMD Kab. Kepulauan Riau (Riau Islands Regency Investment Coordination and Regional Promotion Board), Potential Investment Research Report (Pengkajian Peluang Investasi Potensi/ Unggulan Daerah), 2005. 3. Blacksell M. and Gilg A.W. (Nov 1975), “Landscape Evaluation in Practice – the Case of South-East Devon”, Transactions of Institute of British Geographers, number 66. 4. Briffet C. (2001), “Is Managed Recreational Use Compatible with Effective Habitat and Wildlife Occurrence in Urban Open Space Corridor Systems?” in Landscape Research 26 (2) pp. 137-163. 5. Code of Practice on Pollution Control (2000 Edition) (with amendments in Feb 2001, Jun 2002 and Feb 2004). 6. Farina A. (1998), Principles and Methods in Landscape Ecology, Chapman & Hall, London. 7. Forman R.T.T. and Godron M. (1986), Landscape Ecology, Wiley and Sons, New York. 8. Freeman C. (1999), “Development of A Simple Method for Site Survey and Assessment in Urban Areas”, Landscape and Urban Planning: 44, pp.1-11. 9. Krivtsov V. (2004), “Investigations of Indirect Relationships in Ecology and Environmental Sciences: A Review and the Implications for Comparative Theoretical Ecosystem Analysis”, Ecological Modelling: 174, pp.37–54. 10. Kusnama, K. Sutisna, T.C. Amin, S. Koesoemadinata, Sukardi, B. Hermanto (1994), Systematic Geological Map, Indonesia Sheet Tanjung Pinang, 1016, 1017, Scale 1:250.000, Geological Research and Development Centre, Bandung Indonesia. 11. Li A., Wang A., Liang S. and Zhou W. (2006), “Eco-environmental Vulnerability Evaluation in Mountainous Region Using Remote Sensing and GIS – A Case Study in the Upper Reaches of Minjiang River, China”, Ecological Modelling: 192 (1), pp. 175-187. 12. Macmillan R.A., Jones R.K., McNabb D.H. (2004), “Defining a Hierarchy of Spatial Entities for Environmental Analysis and Modeling Using Digital Elevation Models (DEMs), Computers, Environment and Urban Systems : 28 (3) p. 175 – 200. 13. Malone L.L.C., Environmental Planning Course Notes, MSc Environment Management Program, School of Design and Environment, National University of Singapore. 14. McHarg I. (1992), Design With Nature, John Wileys & Sons, Inc, New York. 15. McHarg I. (1998), Steiner Frederick R. (ed) To Heal the Earth, Selected Writings of Ian L. McHarg, Island Press, Washington D.C. 16. Miller G.T. (2003), Environmental Science, Working With Earth, 10th edition, Brooks/Cole Thomson Learning USA. 17. New International Version Bible, Zondervan Publishing Housing, Michigan, USA 18. Nathanson J.A. (2003), Basic Environmental Technology: Water Supply, Waste Management, and Pollution Control, 4th ed, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, USA, p.252 19. Peachey K, Perry M and Grundy-Warr K (1997) The Riau Islands and Economic Cooperation in the Singapore Indonesian Border Zone, Boundary and Territory Briefing: vol. 2 (3) Number 3 International Boundaries Research Unit, University of Durham, Durham, UK. 20. Penning – Roswell E.C. (1975), “Constraints of The Application of Landscape Evaluations”, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers: 66 (November), pp. 149 – 155. 21. Periplus Travelmaps Bintan: Indonesia Regional, Periplus Travel Maps, (January 1997). 22. Primack B. (2002), Essentials of Conservation Biology, 3rd Edition. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA. 23. Ratcliffe D.A. (1977), A Nature Conservation Reviews, vols. 1 and 2, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 24. Reports of Bandung Urban Discussion Forum in Housing Problems, August 2001, COMBINE. 25. Reports of Bandung Urban Discussion Forum on Garbage Management Problems, January 2002, COMBINE. 26. Riau Islands Planning Agency, Revision of 2006-2015 General Regional Plan Riau Islands Regency (Rancangan Umum Tata Ruang Wilayah Kab. Kepulauan Riau), 2004. 27. Riau Island Planning Agency and PT. Metaforma, Master Plan for Riau Islands Regency Central 2004. 28. Riau Islands Planning Agency and CV Geometric Tehnik (2005), Research and Mapping of Water Recharge and Catchments Potentials in Riau Island Regency (Kajian dan Pemetaan Potensi Daerah Resapan dan Tangkapan Air Hujan di Kab. Kepulauan Riau). 29. Riitters K., Wickham J., O’Neill R., Jones K., Smith E., Coulston J.,Wade T., Smith J., (2002), “Fragmentation of Continental United States Forests”, Ecosystems: 5 (8), pp. 815 – 822. 30. Rossiter D.C. (1994), Lecture Notes “ Land Evaluation”, Cornell University, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Department of Soil, Crop, and Atmospheric Sciences. 31. Semlitsch R., Bodie J. (1998), ” Are Small, Isolated Wetlands Expendable?” in Conservation Biology 12 (5) pp.1129-1133. 32. Statistics Data from Teluk Bintan District Office. 33. Store R., Jokimäki J. (2003), “A GIS-based Multi-scale Approach to Habitat Suitability Modelling”, Ecological Modelling: 169 (11), pp. 1 – 15. 34. Thampapillai D. (2002), Environmental Economics, Concepts, Methods and Policies, Oxford University Press, Melbourne. 35. Todaro M.P., and Smith S.C.(eds.) (2003), Economic Development, Pearson, Harlow England, pp. 46-71. 36. Urban Planning Guide (1986) (ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice; no 49), American Society of Civil Engineers, New York. 37. Weiss S.F., Donnelly T.G. and Kaiser E.J. (1966), “Land Value and Land Development Influence Factors: An Analytical Approach for Explaining Policy Alternatives” in Land Economics: 42 (2), pp 230-33. 38. White E.T. (1985), Site Analysis: Diagramming Information for Architectural Design, Architectural Media, USA. 39. Whitten T., Damanik S.J., Anwar J., and Hisyam N. (2000), Ecology of Sumatra, Periplus, Singapore. 40. Ye Y. (2004), A Study on Landscape Structure and Ecological Regionalization of Mountain Ecosystem, submitted to The Graduate School of Chinese Academy of Science for the Degree of Ph.D. (in Chinese). Websites

1. Chantefort and J. Fontanel, under direction of P. Legris and F. Blasco, Bioclimates of South East Asia, Indonesia I and Malaysia, ISRIC, Wageningen, Netherlands, 1974 http://eusoils.jrc.it/esdb_archive/EuDASM/Asia/images/maps/download/XA2002_1CL.jpg 2. Global, National, and Sub National Conservation Status Ranks. National Heritage Data Center. URL: http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/ranking.htm, accessed September, 2003. 3. http://lnweb18.worldbank.org/ESSD/sdvext.nsf/60ByDocName/CaseStudy4IndonesiaParticipatoryApproachesinBudgetingandPublicExpenditureManagementSDNote73March2003/$FILE/sdn73.pdf#search=’cibangkong’ 4. http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/EASTASIAPACIFICEXT/EXTEAPREGTOPSOCDEV/0,,contentMDK:20477526~pagePK:34004173~piPK:340 5. http://www.bakosurtanal.go.id 6. http://www.combine.or.id/program_04g.html 7. http://www.crisp.nus.edu.sg 8. http://www.indonesianforest.com/ 9. http://www.kimpraswil.go.id/infoStatistik/bencana/ 10. http://www.profauna.or.id/Indo/Fakta_satwa.html 11. http://www.ura.gov.sg/dgp_reports/punggl21/home.html 12. Red List of Threatened Species. International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). URL: http://www.redlist.org, accessed September, 2003. 13. Schueler T.R., “Chapter 5: The Architecture of Stream Buffers” in Site Planning for Urban Stream Protection. Center for Watershed Protection, Ellicott City, M.D. Prepared for the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, D.C. 1995, URL: http://www.cwp.org/SPSP/TOC.htm, accessed September, 2003. 14. Team GeoMedia Online Research Library, Assessing Land Suitability and Carrying Capacity, Anna University 15. United States Federal List of Threatened and Endangered Species, URL: http://endangered.fws.gov, accessed September, 2003. i http://www.kimpraswil.go.id/infoStatistik/bencana/ Download PDF pada http://www.scribd.com/doc/21183595/PENGEMBANGAN-PERANGKAT-EVALUASILAHAN-ALiT-UNTUK-NEGARA-NEGARA-BERKEMBANG-DENGAN-STUDIKASUS-PULAU-BINTAN-INDONESI Kategori:Ekonomi - Economy, Lingkungan - Environmental, Sosial - Social, Tata Ruang Spatial Planning Tag:AMDAL, Eco-City, Evaluasi Lahan, Kota Berkelanjutan, Perencanaan Tata Ruang Ekologis, Studi Kelayakan, Sustainable Urban Development

RSS feed

Random Posts AR633 – DESAIN INKLUSI-EVALUASI AKSESIBILITAS DAN REDESAIN PARTISIPATIF SMP YPAB, SURABAYA SUSTAINABLE FISHERMAN’S HOME DESIGN FOR PANGGANG ISLAND REVITALIZATION, SERIBU ISLANDS, JAKARTA Ayorek! Building urban knowledge dynamics as a foundation for creative and collaborative participation Sharing Forum Gelar Kota dan Bandung Indepent Living Center di Ayorek! 21 April 2012 Draft Paper of ICCI 2017

Awan Tag

Aksesibilitas Aman Banjir Jakarta 2007 Climate Change Collaborative Integrated Water Resource Management Desain-inklusi Drainase EcoArchitecture Environmental Planning Flood Mitigation Green Architecture green building Green Impact Indonesia - English Improving Green Open Space Inclusive Design Integrasi Tata Ruang dan Tata Air Integrated Ecological Planning Integrated

Water Resource Management IWRM Kota Layak Huni Land Evaluation Landscape Evaluation Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design LEED LEED for Homes LID Low Cost Low Impact

Development participatory design. Perencanaan Tata Ruang Ekologis Redesain Partisipatif Service Learning Sistem Polder Berkelanjutan Sustainable Agriculture Sustainable Architectural Design

Sustainable Architecture Sustainable Development Sustainable Land Development Sustainable Planning Sustainable Urban

Sustainable Urban Development Toileting Culture True Green Development Urban Polder Visi berkurangnya banjir di Surabaya

Kategori Desain Arsitektur – Architecture Design Ekonomi – Economy Lingkungan – Environmental Sosial – Social Tata Ruang – Spatial Planning Uncategorized

Senarai Blog WordPress.com WordPress.org

Arsip Januari 2018 Oktober 2017 Agustus 2017 Juli 2017 April 2017 November 2016 November 2014 Agustus 2014 Juli 2014 Juni 2014 Januari 2014 Desember 2013 Agustus 2013 Juli 2013 Mei 2013 Januari 2013 November 2012 Agustus 2012 Juli 2012 Juni 2012 April 2012 Maret 2012 Januari 2012 November 2011 September 2011 Agustus 2011 Mei 2011 Februari 2011 Desember 2010 November 2010 Juli 2010 Juni 2010 Mei 2010 April 2010 Maret 2010 Januari 2010

Meta Daftar Masuk Puncak Blog di WordPress.com.