Analisis Eksistensi Benda Cagar Budaya Dalam Tata Ruang Kota Guna Mendukung Pelestariannya di Kota Surakarta.

*Nindya Ayu Wardani  -  Institut Pertanian Bogor, Indonesia
Baba Barus  -  Institut Pertanian Bogor, Indonesia
Siti Nurisyah  -  Institut Pertanian Bogor, Indonesia
Received: 18 Oct 2018; Published: 29 May 2020.
Open Access
Citation Format:
Abstract

The City of Surakarta, one of National Activity Center and also known as Eco Cultural City, has 171 cultural heritage objects  have to be preserved. City development that leads to modernization, physically, is a threat to the existence of those cultural heritage objects.To minimize lost of these valuable objects, risk management method,  which is based on the interaction between their vulnerability and hazard, could be carried out. This study was aimed to identify and categorize cultural heritage objects at the city, to analyze the risk of losing of cultural heritage objects, and to recommend future city spatial planning in relation to cultural heritage objects. This research was conducted through visual classification techniques on high resolution satellite imagery, Weighted Overlay, Overlay Analysis and Descriptive Analysis. Surakarta City's cultural heritage objects mostly have 100-200 years old which is dominated by traditional Javanese architectural styles. Cultural heritage objects are not fully in good condition, as many as 35 units were partially damaged, 9 units suffered total damage, and 5 units have experienced modernization. A total of 33 cultural heritage objects covered an area of 886,556 square meters (46.09%) are at a high risk of losing their existence. To protect the existence of cultural heritage, the result research should to considered of the city developtment program.

Keywords: heritage; weighted overlay; risk management

Article Metrics:

  1. Almadani, MR, Gunawan, I. 2013. Identifikasi Bangunan Cagar Budaya Bangunan Kuning Agung, Senghie, Pontianak. Lanting Journal of Architecture 2 (1):17-28.
  2. Arikunto, S. 2013. Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta (ID): Rineka Cipta.
  3. Barus, B dan Wiradisastra, US. 2009. Sistem Informasi Geografis: Sarana Manajemen sumberdaya. Bogor (ID): IPB.
  4. Buchori, I, Susilo, J. 2012. Model Keruangan untuk Identifikasi Kawasan Longsor. TATALOKA 4 (4): 282-294.
  5. Chandio, IA, Nasir, A. 2011. GIS-based Multi-criteria Decision Analysis of Land Suitability for Hillside Development. International Journal of Environmental Science and Development 2 (6): 469-473.
  6. [DTRK] Dinas Tata Ruang Kota Surakarta. 2014. Rencana Aksi Kota Pusaka Tahun 2014. Surakarta (ID): Dinas Tata Ruang Kota Surakarta.
  7. Direktorat Pelestarian Cagar Budaya dan Permuseuman. 2016. "Pemahaman Tentang Vulnerability pada Cagar Budaya" diakses dari https://kebudayaan.kemdikbud.go.id/ditpcbm, pada tanggal 1 April 2018.
  8. Eastman, JR. 2006. IDRISI Andes Guide to GIS and Image Processing. Worcester (US): Clark University.
  9. [ICOMOS]. International Council on Monuments and Sites. 2009. World Heritage in Danger. Paris (FR): International Council on Monuments and Sites.
  10. [ICOMOS] International Council on Monuments and Sites. 2015. Culture Heritage, the UN Sustainable Developments Goals, and the New Urban Agenda. Paris (FR): International Council on Monuments and Sites.
  11. Mansor, M, Latip, Mohamod, LH. 2013. Identifying Cultural Landscape Components in the District of Kuala Kangsar, Perak, Malaysia. Asian Cultural Landscape Association International Symposium; 12-14 Oktober 2013; Seoul (KR); ACLA:65-72.
  12. Perles, A and Garcia-Diego, F. 2018. An energy-efficient internet of things (IoT) architecture for preventive conservation of cultural heritage. Future Generation Computer Systems. 81: 566-581.
  13. Riad, PHS, Bilib, M, and El Din, ME. 2011. Application of The Overlay Weighter Model and Boolean to Determine the Best Locations for Artificial Recharge of Grounwater. Journal Urban and Enviromental Enginering. 5 (2): 57-66.
  14. Runa, IW, Warnata, IN dan Mahaputra, ING. 2011. Heritage Area Conditions in The City Centre of Denpasar. Denpasar (ID): Universitas Warmadewa.
  15. Shafaghat, A, Ghaserni, MM, and Ferwati, MS. 2017. Sustainable riverscape preservation strategy framework using goaloriented method: Case of historical heritage cities in Malaysia. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (6): 143-159.
  16. [Setneg] Sekretariat Negara Republik Indonesia. 2007. Undang-Undang Nomor 26 Tahun 2007 tentang Penataan Ruang. Jakarta (ID): Sekretariat Negara.
  17. [Setneg] Sekretariat Negara Republik Indonesia. 2010. Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2010 tentang Cagar Budaya. Jakarta (ID): Sekretariat Negara.
  18. Sugiyono. 2010. Metode Penelitian Pendidikan Pendekatan Kuantitatif, kualitatif,dan R&D. Bandung (ID): Alfabeta.
  19. Tarraguel, AA. 2011. Developing an Approach for Analysing the Possible Impact of Natural Hazards on Cultural Heritage: a Case Study in the Upper Svaneti region of Georgia [Tesis]. Enschede (NL): University of Twente.
  20. Turner, BJ, Kasperson, Christensen, L, Luers, A, Polsky, C, Pulsipher, A, [UNISDR] United Nations Officer of Disaster Risk Reduction. 2009. Terminology on Disaster Risk Reduction. Geneva (ZH): UNISDR.
  21. [UNISDR] United Nations Officer of Disaster Risk Reduction. 2009. Terminology on Disaster Risk Reduction. Geneva (ZH): UNISDR.
  22. Wibowo, AB. 2012. Strategi Pelestarian Benda/Situs Cagar Budaya Berbasis Masyarakat Kasus Pelestarian Benda/Situs Cagar Budaya Gampong Pande Kecamatan Kutaraja Banda Aceh Provinsi Aceh. Banda Aceh (ID): Badan Pelestarian Nilai Budaya Banda Aceh.
  23. Zaida, SNA, dan Arifin, NHS. 2010. Surakarta: Perkembangan Kota sebagai Akibat Pengaruh Perubahan Sosial Pada Bekas Ibukota Kerajaan di Jawa. Jurnal Lanskap Indonesia. 2 (2): 83-92.