Common Space Utilization in Kutobedah Story-Building in Malang

Pemanfaatan Ruang Bersama Pada Rumah Susun Kutobedah, Kota Malang (english)

Hammam Rofiqi Agustapraja,

 Email: hamiqi@yahoo.com

Abstract

Kutobedah is known as the slum region of Malang and inhabited by hundred of families with clustered houses and eliminate any public space. Viewing this existing condition of dense population in Kutobedah, municipal government has build rumah susun (storybuilding) in the centre of this dense region, but in reality this storybuilding also looks dirty and dense between inhabitants. Based on this view, this study was conducted and aimed to see the phenomenon of society within this storybuilding in creating public space as container of their social activities, sought from phenomenology glasses, thus eventually this study result would be expected to give description concerning space creation in common space utilization. Method used is phenomenology method, by seeing and directly feeling how does people of Kutobedah storybuilding in utilizing space as common space that could be used by all storybuilding inhabitants. Result obtained by this study showed that people of this region utilize the remain open space, in between space of building, road, street junction and even sacred cemetery as their fulfillment of needs in public space.

Keywords: common space, storybuilding, Kutobedah

Introduction;

1. Background

City of Malang is a city in East Java that has important roles for development center in East Java region, position of Malang as the second biggest city in East Java after Surabaya was viewed from its trading facilities, education, office affairs, residences and industrial has made this city becoming more appealing for people in other region to urbanized into this city. Based on demography data in 2002, Malang has one of East Java area that has highest density in population other than Surabaya, Mojokerto and Probolinggo. High level growth and density in Malang area has cause low income people (masyarakat berpenghasilan rendah – mbr) which didn’t able to release a part of land in order to build a building, finally would build wild buildings on railway side, underneath bridges, and along riverbanks (daerah aliran sungai – das), one is in DAS Brantas. One of residences near it would be slum-residence Kutobedah. 

Historically, Kutobedah was established while in the year of 1400, that is when Islamic kingdom conquered Majapahit kingdom, Patih of Majapahit has runaway to Malang area. He would then establish an independent Hindu kingdom, which by his descendants would be hard-fought to create one advance kingdom. Center of the kingdom lies in Malang and until now it is still seen how its sturdy fort building named Kutobedah at the village of Kutobedah. Looking at it historically, this area is one of the oldest area in Malang.

Administratively, Kutobedah village lies in Kotalama sub-district, Kedungkandang district. This village is a dense-populated village, neighboring with great public cemetery called “Kuburan Kutobedah”.

One effort by government in addressing problems of residences along DAS Brantas would be by building 2 unit of story-building in Kutobedah. According to Sony Wibisono, deputy of DPD REI East Java (2007) development plan of East Java story-building in particular, it would be realized by prioritizing its development in Surabaya, Sidoarjo, Malang, Jember, Madiun and Gresik. 

This was proven by target of three unit story-building at 2008 that is in Ciptomulyo sub-district, Tunggulwulung sub-district (Malang regency), and Tlogowaru sub-district (Malang city). Kutobedah story-building was build in fixed land since it is located in the middle of dense-population area, in addition to that, has narrowed the existed public space, which could be utilized as common space for the needs of inhabitant as social being to socialize.

Study Objectives

Objectives of this study is to try in answering problems of study, that is, how does people in Kutobedah storybuilding would utilize space as common space to be used by all inhabitant?

Study Method

Method used in this study is analytic descriptive method, with descriptive study aimed to seek factual information in order to create imaging in field, by seeing phenomenon existing on the field, and this findings would be analyze to obtain data inferences.

Literature review

1. common space:

Notohadiningrat (2006) explained that lay out (tata ruang) is architectural realization of space utilization and pattern in utilizing space, either planned or unplanned. Lay out of outdoor space would encompass landscape and space utilization pattern.

According to Lang (1987), common space would give opportunity for people in meeting others but to realize this, it would need several catalysts. Catalyst could be done individual by bringing people together in an activity, discussion or general topic. Common space could an open or closed area. According to Rustam Hakim (1987), open space basically is a good neighborhood either individually or in group and could be used by public (everyone).

2. Storybuilding:

According to legislation no 16 article 1 year 1985, definition of “rumah susun - storybuilding” is storied building developed in a neighborhood consist of parts that functionally structured either in horizontal or vertical direction and would be units in which each of it could be own and used separately, particularly for residences, equipped with common part, common thing and common land, whilst “unit of storybuilding” would be story-building that its main function was to be used separately as residences.

Koeswahyono (2004:22), also suggested that the objective of storybuilding development is an effort:

a.    in meeting the need of appropriate settlement in healthy neighborhood,

b.    realizing harmony and balance residences,

c.     rejuvenate slums area,

d.    optimizing resources in land and urban site,

e.     encouraging high-density residences development;

Koeswahyono (2004:13), also stated that storybuilding viewed from its functional point of view could be divided into three part as follows: a. residential storybuilding that is storybuilding in all its entirety being used as residences, b. storybuilding not for residential area that is storybuilding  in all its entirety being used as venture operation and or social activities, c. mixed story-building that is story-building in partial would function as residences and partly function as venture operation. Based on legislation no.25 year 2000, it is provided in national development policy, which would concern with urban development, residential development, facilities in residential development, space arrangement and poor empowerment.

Rejuvenation program in the city basically is a planned development effort to change and renewed low-quality built-up area so that value of this area could be increased. This decrease could be due to inappropriate physical condition of the neighborhood in order to support function effectiveness of neighborhood/region or due to weathering of age. Other than these, due to city development, it might cause its function to decrease or no longer appropriate with city plan after development (Siswono Yudohusodo et al., 1991: 332); storybuilding as an alternative in rejuvenating slum area of a city, decisions in stopping urban enfoldment as the main element of “housing strategy” would means a necessity to made residential development in the form of high building, in about five until fifteen story high (Abdurrahman Wahid, 1983 in Eko Budiharjo: (editor), 1998 : 32) ; building of storybuilding would also a concept of “kampung susun”, it means approach implemented for its physical or its inhabitant system would refer not far from the actual village living (Eko Budihardjo. 1991). The existence of “storybuilding” would no longer create psychological problems. Since viewed from candidate of inhabitant, they seems to be accustomed to live in slums area (ml, Oetomo, 1991).

Result and Discussion

1. Common space utilization within building:

 Storybuilding Kutobedah consist of two building, in which each building consist of 3 floor, with details as follows:

On the 1st floor (at time of storybuilding a and b) there were 14 units of residences,  1 musholla, 12 public kitchen, 12 public bathroom and 1 two-wheel parking site;

On 2nd floor (at time of storybuilding a and b) there were 17 units of residences, 1 musholla (at time of building b there is no musholla), 12 public bathroom and 12 kitchen;

On 3rd floor (at time of storybuilding a and b), there were 18 units of residences, 12 kitchen, 12 public bathroom;

Musholla (pray room) in storybuilding a exist in 1st and 2nd floor, for musholla in 1st floor used for sholat berjamaah, while one on 2nd floor used for sholat and reading Qur’an. While for storybuilding b, there is only one musholla.

Bathroom and kitchen existed 6 units each in right and left side, for the bathroom, 4 unit used for bathing and 2 unit used to defecate.

Viewing space composition existed in each floor (bathroom and kitchen) there should be convention along inhabitant in each floor, they should agreed for each unit bathroom used and maintained by 3-5 units of residences. While for the kitchen, its ownership didn’t belong like bathroom, kitchen ownership used by one unit of residences, and this claim would depend on one occupy storybuilding first. Given that each floor consist of about 13-18 units of residences, part of resident would not own any kitchen thus they would create their own kitchen and mostly take place at their terrace.

Two-wheel parking site only size about 3 x 7 m. Of course, this would not be able to contain all inhabitant vehicles, for those who cannot park their vehicle, they could put it in common place (corridor) and sometimes deposited to lower inhabitant, since most would still have kinship between ground floor inhabitant and the one above it.

2. common place utilization in outside of building:

Space utilization of the “remained” space formed between building mostly used as children playground of storybuilding inhabitant, other than that this kind of space existed in front of residential unit (terrace) would be use as small venture.

At roadside (southern part) of storybuilding there is garbage cart and its pound, but inhabitant’s garbage didn’t contain appropriately thus it usually spillover by the road and causing dirty and poor view

Automobile parking site provided by this storybuilding (at eastern part), has functioned as place to drying clothes of most inhabitants, but this function replacement only lasted temporary, only when daylight (except when it rains) and waiting for their clothes to be dried under the sun. Its real function (as automobile parking site) still being used by most car owner.

Conclusion:

The need of common space (space within building) provided by building designer, sometimes unable/lack in its ability to contain the need of this storybuilding inhabitant, thus most inhabitant would create their own space as they need more space; this need of social space in storybuilding (outside of building) would be shaped individually, as long as there is empty space and this would lead to common agreement that this space is a territory of one/group of inhabitant in this storybuilding. It could be seen from place to sun-drying their clothes that lies outside of building.

Preface:

Alhamdulillah we pray to God Almighty that already gives support during implementation of our study. Same thing could be said for the assistance of dr. Agung, and all class peers for their support, and people of Kutobedah storybuilding for their information and Brawijaya University officials for the fluency arrangement of this national seminar.  This journal writing is far from perfect and it is expected to be perfected and developed for subsequent study.

Referensi

 [1]Budiharjo, Eko. (1983). Story-Building in Indonesia studied from Architecture and Planologi : Story-building panel discussion papers, Department of Arsitektur,

 [2]The Housing Directorat. 1993. Technical Requirements the Construction of Story-building, DPU-Cipta Karya, Jakarta

[3] The Housing Directorat. 1993. The Construction of Participatory. DPU-Cipta Karya, Jakarta

[4]Lang, Jon.(1987). Creating Architectural Theory : Van Nostand Reinhold, New York

[5]Uika Sugiyapranata; in Eko Budiharjo 1998. a number of problems of Urban settlement, Alumni, Bandung. 

origin jurnal:
Pemanfaatan Ruang Bersama Pada Rumah Susun Kutobedah, Kota Malang

Sumber : http://hamiqi.blogspot.com/2013/01/pemanfaatan-ruang-bersama-pada-rumah.html#ixzz2aQjmAcM7