IDENTIFIKASI INDEKS KENYAMANAN KOTA YOGYAKARTA BERDASARKAN KRITERIA CULTURAL HERITAGE

*Ayu Candra Kurniati -  Sekolah Tinggi Teknologi Nasional (STTNAS) Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Fahril Fanani -  Sekolah Tinggi Teknologi Nasional (STTNAS) Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Received: 2 Oct 2018; Published: 29 Nov 2019.
Open Access
Citation Format:
Abstract

The ideal city planning, in fact is the combination between livable and sustainable city, where the city is able to maintain the quality of life in the present as well as the future, furthermore it generates a comfortable atmosphere for a place to live as seen from many aspects.  Yogyakarta is one of the livable cities in Indonesia with the highest index score, 68.14% for social life and 70.89% for the preservation of cultural heritage building. Considering the mission of Yogyakarta which is to enhance cultural quality and strengthen morality, behavior and cultural value of the community, it is considerable to conduct a research regarding to livable city index in Yogyakarta based on the criteria of cultural heritage.   Furthermore, this research used scoring dichotomy data as a methodology with variables: the changes in building's form and function, the ownership status and the usage of cultural heritage building, as well as the amount of cultural heritage buildings that have been demolished and/or in the process of demolition. The results show the highest livable index for preservation of cultural heritage building is in cultural preservation area Kotagede (41.77%), followed by Kraton (20.66%), Malioboro (14.06%), Pakualaman (13.21%) and the least is Kotabaru (10.03%). Kotagede has the highest livable index due to the amount of cultural heritage building compared to other preservation areas. From the total percentage, 42.9% of the buildings are in the original form, 30% have its function changed, 70% are in personal ownership, 21.6% are in group/association, and 45.5% are not demolished. The conclusion of this study is that the existence of cultural heritage building in the city will increase the value of environmental identity which is resembles the character of the area and the community within

Keywords
livable index; cultural heritage building; city identity

Article Metrics:

  1. Bell, Karen. 2000. Urban Amenity Indicators: The Livability of Our Urban Environments. Ministry for the Environment of Auckland City.
  2. Darise D.I, Tondobala L, Gosal P.H.2015. Kajian Kota Manado sebagai Kota Layak Huni berdasarkan Kriteria (IAP) Ikatan Ahli Perencanaan. [Skripsi]: Universitas Sam Ratulangi. 1(1): 131-140.
  3. Dinas Perizinan dan Penanaman Modal DIY, 2018
  4. Hadiyanta Ign, Eka. 2015. Kawasan Cagar Budaya di Yogyakarta: Citra, Identitas, dan Branding Ruang. Yogyakarta: Jurnal Widya Prabha. Vol. 04/ IV/ 2015
  5. Ikatan Ahli Perencanaan (IAP). 2016. The Most Liveable City in Indonesia. https://issuu.com/iapindonesia/docs/mlci_2014_presentasi_compatibility. Diakses pada 03 Juni 2017
  6. Marbun J. 2012. Pelestarian Benda dan Bangunan Cagar Budaya di Yogyakarta. https://joemarbun.wordpress.com/permasalahan-kawasan-cagar-budaya. Diakses pada 28 April 2018
  7. Muttaqin D. 2010. Most Livable City Index, Tantangan Menuju Kota Layak Huni. Bulletin Tata Ruang Edisi Januari-Februari 2010. ISSN: 1978-1571. Jakarta: Badan Koordinasi Penataan Ruang Nasional
  8. Pemerintah Kota Yogyakarta. 2017. Visi dan misi Kota Yogyakarta. Diakses pada 28 Agustus 2018 dari https://jogjaprov.go.id/profil/4-visi-misi-tujuan-dan-sasaran
  9. Peraturan Daerah Provinsi Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta No 10 Tahun 2012 tentang Pelestarian Warisan Budaya dan Cagar Budaya. Yogyakarta
  10. Peraturan Gubernur Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta Nomor 62 Tahun 2013 tentang Pelestarian Cagar Budaya. (2013).
  11. Sujarweni, Wiranta. 2015. SPPS untuk Penelitian. Pustaka Baru Press. Yogyakarta
  12. Tan, Thye, et all. 2014. A New Approach to Measuring the Liveability of Cities: the Global Liveable Cities Index. World Review of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development. Vol 11, No.2, 2014.
  13. Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1992, tentang Benda dan Bangunan Cagar Budaya.
  14. Wahyudi D. 2012. Kepemilikan Benda Cagar Budaya (Antara Kewajiban dan Hak). http://pusakanuswantara.blogspot.com/2012/10/kepemilikan-benda-cagar-budaya-antara.html. Diakses 27 Mei 2018
  15. Wheleer, Stephen. 2004. The Sustainable Urban Development Reader. Psychological Press. New York
  16. Widyanto, Andreas Haryo. 2016. Perizinan pemanfaatan bangunan cagar budaya untuk bisnis waralaba London Beauty Center (LBC) di Kota Yogyakarta. Diakses pada 27 Agustus 2018 dari http://e-journal.uajy.ac.id/id/eprint/11582.
  17. Wirastari, Amanda & Suprihardjo, Rimadewi. 2012. Pelestarian keawasan cagar budaya berbasis partisipasi masyarakat (studi kasus: kawasan cagar budaya Bubutan, Surabaya). Jurnal teknik ITS, 1(1), 63-67