Fajar

 Rezandi  
1313375  
Establishing  Best  Practice  of  Public  Open  Space  in  Jakarta  -­‐  Based  on  Case  
Studies.  
 
Research  Overview  
Public   open   space   holds   a   very   important   role   in   community   since   the   time   of  
classical   planning   and   architecture,   until   nowadays   in   the   development   of   urban  
environment.  The  existence  of  public  open  space  allows  people  to  socialize,  express  
in  democratic  ways,  or  sit/linger  in  undemanding  way  for  a  while  in  between  moving  
from  place  to  place  as  access.  On  the  other  hand,  Jakarta,  as  a  big  urban  space  and  
its   function   as   capital   city,   still   does   not   posses   sufficient   number   of   good   quality  
public   open   space,   yet   it   is   the   high   density   capital   of   Indonesia   which   many  
important  function  of  the  country  occur.  The  aim  of  this  research  is  to  establish  the  
best  practice  of  public  open  spaces  in  Jakarta  with  reference  of  case  studies  from  old  
and  contemporary  public  open  space  throughout  the  world,  to  provide  good  design  
quality  with  impacts  on  better  social  life  for  people  who  lives  or  commute  within  this  
city.    
 
Research  Context  
Jakarta   is   a   capital   city   of   Indonesia,   which   has   most   advanced   facilities   and  
technology   in   Indonesia,   such   as   center   of   government,   business   district,   industry  
area,  and  urban  recreation  in  one  place,  it  is  entitled  as  metropolitan  city  with  area  
of   662.33   km2   and   population   of   10,187,935.   It   has   five   districts   on   the   land   area,  
which   are   North   Jakarta,   West   Jakarta,   Central   Jakarta,   East   Jakarta,   and   South  
Jakarta.  This  city  also  called  “megapolitan”  (Mutiara  and  Isami,  2011)  because  of  its  
tendency   upon   urban   sprawl   that   formed   other   surrounding   new   cities   such   as  
Bogor,  Depok,  Tangerang,  and  Bekasi  (Jabodetabek).  Ironically,  for  a  city  with  broad  
area   and   high   intensity   of   urban   activities,   Jakarta   still   lack   of   public   open   space  
existence.  Only  a  few  existing  public  open  space  or  9,8%  (Mutiara  and  Isami,  2011;  
Nasution   and   Zahrah,   2012;   Sitadevi   and   Pryadi,   2012,   Siahaan,   2011),   a   total   of   350  
(Indonesian  Ministry  of  Public  Works,  2013)  which  caused  by  development  of  offices  
or  commercial  buildings  (Supriatna,  2013).  This  fact  is  contradictive  with  the  climate  
where   Jakarta   lies,   which   is   in   tropical   climate   country   where   there   is   rather  
favorable   temperature   and   weather   for   people   to   be   outside   of   buildings,   but   the  
accommodation  is  deficient  (Sitadevi  and  Pryadi,  2012).    
 
Furthermore,   from   those   amounts   of   public   open   spaces   in   this   city,   there   are  
merely  5  -­‐  10  recommended  (Patters,  2013).  This  is  caused  by  existing  condition  or  
quality   of   public   open   space   in   Jakarta   are   not   legible   as   a   public   space   (Sitadevi   and  
Pryadi,   2012),   such   as   fencing   and   opening   hours   arrangement   which   leads   to  
privatization  of  public  space,  the  spaces  do  not  connect  between  important  nodes  or  
places,   pedestrian   paths   are   not   comfortable   for   pedestrian   (scale,   size,   material,  
shades,  and  continuity),  and  maintenance  or  cleanliness  (Mutiara  and  Isami,  2011).  
 
Another  ironic  condition  is  the  uncontrolled  and  massive  development  of  shopping  
malls  in  Jakarta  or  another  example  of  privatization  of  public  space,  which  are  a  total  
of   173   malls   (Widodo,   2013),   where   mostly   located   in   Central   and   South   Jakarta,  
later  on  made  Jakarta  as  the  highest  number  of  malls  in  the  world  (Supriatna,  2013),  
 Fajar  Rezandi  
1313375  
hold  a  big  role  of  diminishing  public  open  space,  as  well  as  replace  the  needs  of  it.  
Even  several  shopping  malls  tried  to  provide  a  form  of  public  open  park  inside  their  
area.  However  shopping  malls  will  never  be  a  public  space  as  a  whole,  even  though  
people   rather   go   there   as   a   meeting   point,   sharing   information,   or   just   to   seek  
relaxation,   it   still   shows   the   face   of   private   place   (Siahaan,   2011).   Most   people,  
especially  middle  (the  biggest  number  of  social  class  in  Jakarta)  to  high  class  tends  to  
go  to  shopping  malls.  But  then,  not  all  people  are  able  to  go  to  shopping  centres,  this  
phenomenon  causes  a  condition  of  only  low  class  people  go  to  public  open  spaces  
(Mutiara  and  Isami,  2012),  which  brings  out  questions  about  the  safety  and  comfort  
of  public  open  spaces  and  pedestrian  paths  for  higher  social  classes.    
 
With   the   absence   of   public   open   space,   it   is   clear   that   the   tendency   of   rapid  
development   does   not   followed   by   the   development   of   quality   of   life   within   the   city  
(Sitadevi   and   Pryadi,   2012).   In   this   context   of   “endangered”   public   open   space  
existence,   I   propose   to   undertake   a   study   investigating   the   key   points   in   designing  
good  public  open  space  to  be  applied  in  Jakarta.    
 
Literature  Review  
There   are   many   literatures   discussing   about   public   open   space.   Theoretical   basic  
about  public  open  space  and  its  design  or  planning  criteria  can  be  found  in  Stephen  
Carr’s   Public   Space   book   (1992).   He   discussed   the   definition   of   public   space   and  
public   life,   making   public   space   (using   dimensions,   the   process,   and   the   future   of  
public  space),  as  well  as  case  studies  of  public  spaces  throughout  America.  Jan  Gehl  
in   Life   Between   Buildings,   (1987/2011),   which   have   a   comprehensive   study   of  
principles   and   design   quality   criteria   of   public   open   space   to   enhance   the   human  
quality   of   life   in   the   public   realm.   His   methodology,   to   regenerate   Copenhagen   from  
a   city   of   traffic   place   to   people   place   in   1962,   is   by   conducting   observation   of  
outdoor  activities  and  how  people  interact  in  outdoor  space,  which  determined  by  
the  quality  of  physical  environment.    
 
“When   outdoor   areas   are   of   high   quality,   necessary   activities   take   place   with  
approximately   the   same   frequency   -­‐   though   they   clearly   tend   to   take   a   longer   time,  
because   the   physical   conditions   are   better.   In   addition,   however,   a   wide   range   of  
optional   activities   will   also   occur   because   place   and   situation   now   invite   people   to  
stop,  sit,  eat,  play,  and  so  on”  (Gehl,  2011).      
 
Public   open   space   also   mentioned   in   Kevin   Lynch’s   book,   Image   of   the   City   (1960),  
stated  that  public  space  is  a  form  of  nodes  and  landmark,  which  used  as  navigation  
tool   within   the   city.   Project   for   Public   Spaces   (PPS,   2000),   which   mostly   uses   Jan  
Gehl,   Jane   Jacobs,   and   other   well   known   architects   or   urban   planners   as   their  
reference,  have  developed  4  key  attributes  that  should  be  addressed  in  place  making  
in  public  open  space  :  Access  and  Linkages,  Comfort  and  Image,  Uses  and  Activities,  
and   Sociability.   Their   study   also   include   the   characteristics   that   explain   why   public  
open   spaces   fail   :   Lack   of   good   places   to   sit;   Lack   of   busy   gathering   points   such   as  
play  grounds,  vending  cart,  and  bus  stops;  Poor  entrances  which  are  uninviting  and  
visually   inaccessible   spaces;   Presence   of   dysfunctional   features   such   as   benches,  
paths,   among   others,   which   are   more   visual   or   aesthetic   oriented   than   functional;  
Uncomfortable  paths,  that  do  not  direct  people  to  where  they  want  to  go;  Vehicle  
 Fajar  Rezandi  
1313375  
orientated  spaces  that  do  not  encourage  safe  and  comfortable  movement  for  people  
or   pedestrian;   Streets   with   no   activities   and   blank   walls   with   no   identity;  
Inconveniently  located  public  transit  stops;  and  No  exciting  activities  occurring  in  the  
place  (Gehl,  2011;  PPS,  2000).  
 
This   theory   of   place   making,   adopted   by   Montero-­‐Avila   (2001)   in   her   study   with  
similar  topic  of  my  research,  which  is  to  regenerate  public  open  spaces  in  Maracaibo,  
Venezuela,   South   America,   where   the   climate   is   not   different   from   Indonesia.   Her  
research   discussed   about   the   needs   of   regenerating   public   open   space   including  
reestablishment   of   climatic   comfort   and   securities   factors   within   the   plazas   in  
Maracaibo.   The   result   of   this   research   provides   recommendation   on   design  
implication  in  order  to  revitalize  plazas  in  Maracaibo.  This  research  indicates  that  the  
theories  of  public  open  space  are  applicable  in  tropical  climate  countries,  but  there  
still  has  to  be  an  analysis  of  local  climate  comfort  preference  to  support  the  adopted  
theory.   As   she   stated   :   “Public   life   is   more   dynamic   in   warm   areas,   although   it   will  
depend  on  people  climatic  tolerance  and  capacity  of  the  setting  to  shelter  users  from  
natural  elements”  (Montero-­‐Avila,  2001).  
 
Past  research  of  public  open  space  in  Jakarta  mostly  discussed  about  the  provision  of  
green   open   space,   which   is   analyzing   a   type   of   public   open   space   from   the  
environmental   elements.   Sitadevi   and   Pryadi   (2012)   in   “Utilization   of   Green   Open  
Spaces  in  Jakarta”  explain  that  from  the  legal  aspect,  there  is  a  provincial  regulation  
governing  green  open  spaces,  but  the  weakness  occurs  in  the  implementation.   They  
also   mentioned   more   about   community   participatory   in   order   to   increase   both  
quantity  and  quality  of  green  open  space.  Mutiara  and  Isami  (2011)  agreed  that  the  
involvement   of   community   in   maintenance   such   as   gardening   would   enhance   the  
usage  of  public  park  in  Jakarta  based  on  case  study  from  Yokohama,  Japan.  However,  
public   space   should   offers   an   opportunity   to   be   with   others   in   a   relaxed   and  
undemanding   way,   which   is   determined   by   the   quality   of   physical   environment  
(Gehl,  2011),  or  in  a  way  those  studies  were  seen  not  from  design  quality  or  place  
making   perspective   (Project   for   Public   Space,   2000),   which   influence   the   use   of  
public  open  space  and  activities  occur  in  the  place  (Nasution  and  Zahrah,  2012).    
 
Siahaan   (2011)   also   discussed   that   both   the   existence   of   public   open   space   and  
green   open   space   hold   the   same   importance   in   urban   environment.   His   research  
develop  the  lacking  aspects  of  public  open  space  in  Indonesia  with  the  example  from  
many  public  spaces  all  over  the  world,  but  there  are  no  direct  comparison  of  existing  
public   open   spaces   or   in   a   way   it   was   not   compared   comprehensively.   Another  
research  that  involved  case  study  conducted  by  Darmawan  and  Sinaga  (2013),  which  
discuss   about   “Improvement   Criteria   for   Public   Open   Space   in   Jakarta   in   Accordance  
to   their   Typology   :   Case   Studies   Plazas   in   Jakarta   Kota   District.”   They   compare  
between   the   unsuccessful   plazas   in   Jakarta   Kota   with   successful   public   spaces   in  
other   part   of   Jakarta   and   determine   key   points   of   criteria   that   Jakarta   Kota   should  
improve.    
 
Obviously,   there   are   still   little   amount   of   research   in   Indonesia   or   specifically   Jakarta  
that   discussed   about   public   open   space   in   design   wise.   Most   of   the   past   research  
 Fajar  Rezandi  
1313375  
that  have  been  done  indicate  that  there  are  no  comprehensive  research  with  using  
other   countries   which   have   better   practice   on   public   spaces   as   case   studies,   either   it  
is   from   the   same   region   of   South   East   Asia,   or   from   other   part   of   the   world.   I   intend  
to   use   several   case   studies   of   public   open   spaces   from   outside   Indonesia,   but   with  
more   in   depth   analysis   and   comparison   of   the   key   points   in   design   and   place   making  
perspective.  
 
Research  Questions  
Throughout   my   research   course   I   aim   to   investigate   how   to   establish   the   best   or  
most   appropriate   public   open   spaces   in   Jakarta.   Is   there   any   public   open   space  
theory   worth   look   into?   What   about   the   history   of   public   open   space   in   Jakarta  
itself?   Having   predecessor   in   public   spaces,   why   are   there   only   a   few   public   open  
spaces   in   Jakarta   currently?   Is   there   any   regulation   of   public   space   existence   or  
management  throughout  the  city?  Most  of  existing  public  open  spaces  in  Jakarta  are  
being   inefficient,   what   are   the   factors   that   cause   this   conditions   and   how   to  
overcome  those  issues  in  either  the  existing  or  new  public  open  spaces?    
 
Research  Outline  
Public  Open  Space  
The   first   research   that   must   be   conducted   is   critical   review   of   public   open   spaces  
theories,   in   order   to   understand   the   definition   and   principles   in   designing   and  
planning   a   public   space.   The   definition   of   Public   Open   Space   based   on   these  
literature   is   outdoor   spaces   which   allow   people   to   socialize   (Danisworo,   1989;  
Whyte,   1985),   express   in   democratic   ways   (Carr,   1992),   or   sit/linger   in   undemanding  
way  for  a  while  in  between  moving  from  place  to  place  as  access  (Gehl,  2011;  Jacobs,  
1961;   Madanipour,   1999)   such   as   plazas,   squares,   parks,   streets,   and   pedestrian  
paths.   Public   open   space   has   to   be   attractive   for   people   to   do   their   various   activities  
(Rivlin,  1994;  CABE  and  DETR,  2001).  One  important  factor  in  urban  environment  is  
the   existence   of   public   open   space   (Shirvani,   1985;   PPS,   2000).   From   the   definition,   I  
intend  to  discuss  more  about  the  key  points  of  designing  public  open  space  based  on  
those   books   and   literatures.   The   key   points   will   be   the   criteria   to   analyse   the   case  
studies  in  this  research.  
 
History  of  Public  Open  Space  in  Jakarta  
Public   open   spaces,   as   part   of   urban   planning,   in   Indonesia   were   introduced   in  
colonial   age   between   1914-­‐1945,   or   the   time   of   Dutch   occupation   (Siahaan,   2010;  
Darmawan   and   Sinaga,   2013).   In   this   time,   most   of   cities   in   Indonesia   including  
Jakarta,   influenced   by   an   architect   and   planner,   Ir.   Thomas   Karsten,   where   the  
existence  of  civic  squares  or  alun-­‐alun  in  front  of  mosques  or  palaces  was  a  strong  
characteristic   (The   Indonesian   City,   1986).   In   Jakarta,   the   square   that   was   built   in  
colonial   time   is   Jakarta   Kota   or   Kota   Tua   (Old   Town),   as   it   used   to   be   Holland’s  
Trading   Company,   VOC   (Verenigde   Oostindische   Compagnie)   city   centre   of   Batavia  
(Darmawan  and  Sinaga,  2013).  By  the  time  Indonesia  became  independent,  the  first  
President,   Ir.   Soekarno,   built   many   public   open   spaces   in   Jakarta,   for   example  
National   Monument   in   Merdeka   Square   located   exactly   in   front   of   the   presidential  
palace,   Welcome   Statue   located   not   far   from   the   monument,   etc.   In   1970s,   the  
percentage   of   public   open   spaces   in   Jakarta   was   35%   (Siahaan,   2010).   It   will   be  
 Fajar  Rezandi  
1313375  
worthwhile  to  study  about  the  history  of  public  open  spaces  in  Jakarta  to  understand  
the  use  of  it  on  previous  decades,  as  well  as  to  investigate  the  shrinkage  of  it.  This  
section  will  also  provide  the  analysis  from  socio  -­‐  cultural  and  environmental  context  
(climate)  perspective,  as  they  are  also  the  important  factors  that  determine  human  
comfort   in   public   space   (Montero-­‐Avila,   2001),   to   give   comprehensive   input   to   the  
research.  
 
Existing  Public  Open  Spaces  in  Jakarta  
The  third  method  is  to  conduct  a  critical  review  of  literatures  and  articles  of  several  
existing   public   open   spaces   in   Jakarta.   I   also   intend   to   do   field   observations   and  
correspondences  to  get  qualitative  data  of  the  existing  conditions  and  to  understand  
what  people  in  Jakarta  think  about  their  public  open  spaces,  as  well  as  quantitative  
data  of  public  open  space  distribution  across  Jakarta.  The  methodology  in  selecting  
existing   case   studies   is   by   looking   into   necessary   activities,   optional   activities,   and  
social  activities  happen  in  public  open  spaces  in  Jakarta,  to  identify  the  reason  why  it  
is  being  frequently  used  or  underused  (Gehl,  2011).  The  case  studies  will  be  analysed  
by  looking  into  several  theories  of  public  open  space  such  as  the  4  key  attributes  of  
place   making   (PPS,   2000).   The   subjects   of   correspondence   will   include   wide   range   of  
people  from  children  to  elderly,  although  the  participants  most  likely  to  be  aged  19  
to  25,  as  their  mobility  within  the  city  are  quite  high.  They  will  be  asked  to  answer  an  
open-­‐ended   questionnaire   of   opinions   towards   remaining   public   spaces   in   Jakarta  
and   how   they   would   like   it   to   be.   This   will   then   be   analysed   to   gain   the   general  
interests  and  issues.  
 
Public  Open  Spaces  Case  Studies  
However,  to  make  better  outcome  of  establishing  public  open  spaces,  there  have  to  
be   an   in   depth   study   from   successful   or   unsuccessful   public   open   spaces   throughout  
the   world   (PPS,   2000).   The   outline   of   my   research   will   be   to   develop   key   points   or  
issues  that  contribute  or  provide  insignificance  which  then  would  be  applied  in  the  
possibilities  of  creating  or  revitalize  public  open  spaces  in  Jakarta.  The  methodology  
in   choosing   case   studies   is   by   looking   into   public   open   space   in   the   same   region  
(South   East   Asia)   and   any   other   country’s   successful   or   unsuccessful   public   open  
spaces   from   distinct   typology   of   public   open   spaces.   There   are   options   to   look   at  
literature  or  journal  of  several  public  open  spaces  in  Singapore  and  Malaysia  for  the  
regional   context   case   studies,   and   to   have   site   surveys   into   several   public   open  
spaces  across  big  cities  in  the  UK  (London  or  Glasgow);  New  York,  US;  Copenhagen,  
Denmark.   I   intend   to   develop   the   research   tool   question   after   the   proposal  
submission   to   select   the   appropriate   case   study   for   my   research.   The   case   studies  
will  be  analysed  by  several  theories  of  public  open  space  to  extract  the  key  points,  
which  then  will  be  compared  with  the  existing  public  open  spaces  in  Jakarta  analysis.    
 
Hypothesis  
I   expect   the   final   outcome   of   this   research   on   establishing   best   practice   of   public  
open   space,   which   will   be   recommendations,   will   improve   the   awareness   of   the  
importance   in   providing   good   quality   of   public   open   space   in   terms   of   design   and  
place   making   or   physical   environment   (Gehl,   2011)   by   learning   from,   especially,  
successful   public   open   spaces   in   big   and   important   cities.   This   will   enhance   the  
 Fajar  Rezandi  
1313375  
possibilities  of  developing  quality  of  life  within  the  city  (Sitadevi  and  Pryadi,  2012),  as  
well   as   enhance   the   possibilities   to   improve   the   legibility   of   Jakarta’s   cityscape  
(Lynch,  1960).  This  can  be  achieved  by  providing  design  implications  and  criteria  to  
be  applied  in  Jakarta’s  current  environment.  
 
Research  Schedule  
To  give  sufficient  time  in  writing  my  dissertation,  I  aim  to  divide  the  timeline  by  the  
methods   of   my   dissertation.   The   first   method   would   be   gathering   and   analysing  
more   literature   on   public   open   space   during   the   holiday   of   December   2013   until  
January  2014.  Secondly,  I  will  gather  the  literature  and  data  of  existing  case  studies  
method   by   conducting   observation   and   correspondences,   as   well   as   gathering   the  
data  of  the  case  studies  of  public  open  spaces  outside  Jakarta  until  the  end  of  March  
2014.  From  that  point,  I  aim  to  start  develop  and  writing  my  dissertation,  as  well  as  
conducting  regular  meetings  with  my  supervisor  in  parallel  from  the  start  of  second  
semester.   I   intend   to   provide   a   comprehensive   piece   of   dissertation   work   by   May  
2014.  
 
Outcomes  :  Who  Will  Benefit  from  The  Research  
 The   intention   of   the   research   is   to   provide   Architects   and   Planners,   particularly   in  
Jakarta,  design  criteria  or  key  points  in  designing  public  open  space.  There  is  also  a  
possibility  that  the  result  of  this  research  may  influence  range  of  other  professions  
or   field   of   study,   such   as   government,   in   order   to   develop   policies   of   public   open  
space   establishment   in   Jakarta.   And   this   research   also   will   become   a   valuable   source  
for   myself   to   continue   to   gain   knowledge   further   in   designing   architecture   that   have  
broad  impact  also  to  surrounding  people  or  even  to  the  city,  not  only  the  user  of  the  
building.  It  is  hope  that  the  findings  and  conclusions  of  this  study  could  encourage  
further   research   and   development   of   design   guidelines   for   improving   the   human  
experience  of  public  open  space  design  in  Jakarta.  Therefore,  the  application  of  this  
research  will  beneficial  for  everyone  who  lives  or  visits  Jakarta  as  the  capital  city  of  
Indonesia.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Fajar  Rezandi  
1313375  
References  :  
CABE  and  DETR  (2001)  The  Value  of  Urban  Design,  London:  Thomas  Telford  
Carr,  Stephen  (1992)  Public  Space.  Cambridge  :  Cambridge  University  Press.  
Danisworo  (1989)  Konsep  Peremajaan  Kota.  Institut  Teknologi  Bandung.  
Gallion,   Arthur   B   and   Eisner,   Simon.   (1986).   The   Urban   Pattern:   City   Planning   and  
Design.  Van  Nostrand  Reinhold  Company.  
Gehl,  Jan.  (2010)  Cities  for  People.  London  :  Island  Press.  
Gehl,  Jan.  (2011)  Life  Between  Buildings  :  Using  Public  Space.  London  :  Island  Press.    
Gehl,  Jan.  (2002)  Public  Space  and  Public  Life  City  of  Adelaide:  2002.  City  of  Adelaide,  
Adelaide.  
Jacobs,  Jane  (1993)  The  Death  and  Life  of  Great  American  Cities.  New  York  :  Random  
House,Inc.  
Lynch,  Kevin  (1960)  Image  of  the  City.  Cambridge  MA  :  MIT  Press.  
Lynch,   Kevin   (1965/1990),   The   Openness   of   Open   Space.   In   :   Banerjee,   T.,  
Southworth,   M.   (Eds),   City   Sense   and   City   Design   :   Writings   and   Projects   of  
Kevin  Lynch,  The  MIT  Press,  Cambridge,  pp  396-­‐412  
Madanipour,   A.   (1999)   Why   Are   the   Design   and   Development   of   Public   Spaces  
Significant   for   Cities,   Environment   and   Planning   B;   Planning   and   Design,   26  
(6),  879-­‐891  
Nas,   P   (1986)   The   Indonesian   City   :   Study   in   Urban   Development   and   Planning.  
Netherland  :  Foris  Publication  
Project  for  Public  Spaces  (2000)  How  to  Turn  a  Place  Around:  A  Handbook  of  Creating  
Successful  Public  Spaces,  New  York  :  Project  For  Public  Space  
Rivlin,L.G.(1994).  Public  spaces  and  public  life  in  urban  areas.  In  Neary,  S.J.,  Symes,  
M.S.,   Brown,   F.E.   (Eds.).   The   Urban   Experience:   A   People-­‐Environment  
Perspective,  pp.  289–296.  London:  Taylor  &  Francis  Group.  
Rossi  ,  Aldo  (1982).  The  Architecture  of  the  City  ,  Cambridge:  MIT  Press  
Whyte,   William   H.   (1985)   The   Social   Life   of   Small   Urban   Space.   Washington   DC   :   The  
Conservation  
 
Bibliography  :  
Bates,  Laurie  J.  &  Santerre,  Rexford  E.  “The  Public  Demand  for  Open  Space  :  Case  of  
Connecticut  Communities.”  Journal  of  Urban  Economics  2001.  
Cattell,   Vicky;   Dines,   Nick;   Gesler,   Will;   Curtis,   Sarah.   “Mingling,   Observing,   and  
Lingering  :  Everyday  Public  Spaces  and  Their  Implications  for  Well-­‐Being  and  
Social  Relations.”  Health  and  Place,  London  2007.  
Darmawan,  Addi  &  Srinaga,  Felia.  “Improvement  Criteria  for  Open  Space  Quality  in  
Jakarta  in  Accordance  to  Their  Typologies  (Case  Study:  Plazas  in  Jakarta  Kota  
District)”.  November  2013.  
Giles-­‐Corti,   Billie;   Melissa   H.   Broomhall;   Matthew   Knuiman;   Catherine   Collins;   Kate  
Douglas;   Kevin   Ng;   Andrea   Lange;   Robert   J.   Donovan.   “Increasing   Walking   :  
 Fajar  Rezandi  
1313375  
How   Important   Is   Distance   To,   Attractiveness,   and   Size   of   Public   Open  
Space?”  American  Journal  of  Preventive  Medicine  2005.  
Kurniawati,  Wakhidah.  “Public  Space  for  Marginal  People.”  Bandung  2011.    
Lim,   Merlyna.   "Transient   Civic   Spaces   in   Jakarta   demopolis."   Globalization,   the   City  
and  Civil  Society  in  Pacific  Asia.  2008.  211.  
Montero-­‐Avila,  I.  Monica.  “Factors  that  Influence  the  Social  Life  and  Vitality  of  Public  
Open   Space   in   Maracaibo   –   Venezuela.   Case   Study   :   Plaza   de   la   Madre   and  
Plaza  de  la  Republica.”  Blacksburg,  September  2001.  
Mubarak,  Husni.  “Merawat  Jakarta  dengan  Hadirnya  Ruang  Terbuka  Hijau  dan  Ruang  
Publik  yang  Sehat.”  February  2012.  
Nasution,   Achmad   Delianur   &   Zahrah,   Wahyuni.   “Public   Open   Space   Privatization  
and  Quality  of  Life,  Case  Study  Merdeka  Square.”  Bandung  2011.  
Sari,   Mutiara   &   Isami,   Kinoshita.   “Characteristic   of   Public   Small   Park   Usage   in   Asia  
Pacific  Countries  :  Case  Study  in  Jakarta  and  Yokohama  City.”  Japan  2011.  
Siahaan,  James.    “Ruang  Publik  :  Antara  Harapan  dan  Kenyataan.”  2010.  
Sitadevi,  Latifa  &  Pryadi,  Jaja.  Utilization  of  green  open  spaces  in  Jakarta  :  Challenge  
and  Current  Status.  2012.  
Sutrisno,   F.X.   Mudji.   “Kota   dan   Budaya   :   Ruang   Publik,   Titik   Temunya?”   Jurnal  
Sekretariat  Negara  RI,  November  2009.  
Tanuwidjaja,   Gunawan;   Doni   J.   Widiantono;   Radiman   Rasyad;   Agus   Sudarman.  
“Integrated   &   Smart   Design   for   Urban   Green   Spaces.”   Arte-­‐Polis   4   Intl  
Conference   –   Creative   Connectivity   and   the   Making   of   Place   :   Living   by   Smart  
Design,  Jakarta  2009.  
Thompson,   Catherine   Ward.   “   Urban   Open   Space   in   the   21st   Century.”   Edinbrugh  
2002.  
Wu,  JunJie  and  Andrew  J.  Plantinga.  “The  Influence  of  Public  Open  Space  on  Urban  
Spatial  Structure.”  Journal  of  Environmental  Economics  and  Management,  
Oregon  2002.  
 
Articles  :  
http://green.kompasiana.com/penghijauan/2013/06/29/dilema-­‐ruang-­‐terbuka-­‐
jakarta-­‐-­‐572833.html  
http://news.detik.com/read/2013/09/16/150619/2359979/10  
http://news.detik.com/read/2012/11/01/145627/2078702/10/5-­‐rencana-­‐ruang-­‐
terbuka-­‐ala-­‐jokowi-­‐untuk-­‐dinginkan-­‐jakarta?9911012  
http://bangazul.com/pengelolaan-­‐jakarta-­‐berkelanjutan/  
http://aditia-­‐novit.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/ruang-­‐terbuka-­‐hijau-­‐di-­‐jakarta-­‐baru-­‐
98.html