Sustainable Future for Human Security (SustaiN’2010) 11-12 December 2010, Kyoto, Japan RETURNING THE SPIRITED AWAY KRUENG ACEH RIVER Urban Design Approach to Promote for River Sustainability
Sylvia Agustina1* and Asri Gani2 1Urban Design and Planning Laboratory, Architecture Department, Syiah Kuala University 2Center for Environment and Natural Resources Studies, Syiah Kuala University
*Corresponding author: [email protected]
ABSTRACT Krueng Aceh riverfront in downtown Banda Aceh, Indonesia received significant attention during post 2004 tsunami reconstrution and rehabilitation. This urban waterfront area used to be perceived negatively as minor urban space or slum area with minor land uses and poor accessibility. However there seems to be a shift from that condition. Several urban design projects were conducted along the waterfront to increase the waterfront use and image as urban public space.The municipal government has even launched a campaign of Banda Aceh as a waterfront city. This research maps out changes that occur along the urban waterfront of Banda Aceh from pre tsunami condition to the present day. Interrelationship between three key aspects in waterfront planning which are land use, access and perception is used as main analytical framework. The research collects data on land use, pedestrian and vehicular access, and user opinion as well as using secondary data of the river environmental condition. The results reveal that urban design improvement projects conducted in the area have succeeded in introducing the new image of a waterfront city but provide very limited spaces to raise awareness towards the river long term environmental management and sustainability. Recommendations are made for further improvement and development that would improve not only the urban waterfront space but aiming for a long term sustainability of the river and surrounding urban area.
Keywords : Krueng Aceh, urban riverfront, land use, access, perception, sustainability
INTRODUCTION The most important segment of the 113 km Krueng Aceh River in urban area is about 1 km between Pante Pirak and Peunayong Bridges in downtown Banda Aceh. This area is a historical mixed-use area with two historic urban centers on each side of the River namely Aceh Market dan Peunayong Market. Krueng Aceh is the main clean water resource for Banda Aceh and Aceh Besar region (Haider, 2006). This role however is not much appreciated by the population as indicated by strong negative perception and treatment towards the river (Agustina, 2009). Report on the survey of river watershed area along its five tributaries namely Krueng Aceh Hilir, Krueng Jreue, Krueng Keumireu, Krueng Inong, and Krueng Seulimum stated that there are significant threats to the water cycle and quality. The main reasons are deforestation, mining and waste. The river debit fluctuation at 95% is also very high compared to 20-20% of normal rate (Development Alternative, Inc., 2006). In contrast to its role as source of drinking water it is also treated and perceived as the main sewer particularly in the urban segment. Field observation in 2004, just a few months before giant tsunami destroyed the area showed that this urban riverfront was deserted, lacking vibrant activities or amenities particularly access amenities despite the important role the river play in the city history and at present time (Agustina, 2004). Post tsunami redevelopments along this waterfront up to 2010 has brought back some lives to few scattered locations and access points following a policy and campaign of the municipal government to position Banda Aceh as a waterfront city. However, the improvements are incomprehensive, physically disconnected and are not taking into account future sustainability of the river. The urban waterfront area should connect the urban resident to the situation upstream and downstream of the river. The beuatification of this primary urban spaces should not be disconnected from fact such as forest fires and logging upstream or a huge waste dumping site downstream. - 183 -
Sustainable Future for Human Security (SustaiN’2010) 11-12 December 2010, Kyoto, Japan Urban design improvement project along the urban waterfront should not merely be artificial or cosmetics for the city. Through careful management of land use, access and perception building the area could serve as window for the urban resident to experience, understand and appreciate the river presence and various roles it play. Understanding of the urban waterfront dynamic through influential relationship between key determining planning factors could better informed future policies addressing the urban river management and river sustainability.
Interrelationship of Key Factors in Urban Waterfront Planning Several factors are attributed to the creation of a successful urban waterfront namely land use, access and perception. Basic distinctions among waterfronts can be made in terms of the water dependency of particular uses, which include: water-dependent uses, water-related uses, and uses that are neither dependent on nor have any relationship to the water resource. Water-dependent uses are those that cannot exist in any other location but on the water. Water-related uses are those that may be located on the water, but could function away from the waterfront. In other words, if real cost savings or revenues can be attributed to a waterfront location, unrelated to land rent or cost, the use is considered water-related. Waterfront uses that are neither dependent nor related to the water are those that can be located equally well away from the shoreline (Wren, 1983). A successful urban waterfront depends on a combination of several factors besides use, but often, appropriate uses, or combination of uses, that are able to attract different types of people and activities around the clock is seen as essential to creating a livable waterfront. Other key factor that contributes to successful waterfront revitalization is attractive, safe, and inviting public access. Without access, urban waterfronts remain cut off, private, and lacking in the single ingredient absolutely necessary for revitalization which is people, lots of people (Goodwin and Good, 1990). There are at least three kinds of access to the waterfront, including physical access, visual access, and mental or interpretive access (Goodwin and Good, 1990). Physical access includes fishing piers, boat ramps, marinas, promenades, esplanades, boardwalks, and public parks. Visual access or the provision of places that allow public to view the water, includes view points, observation towers, or waterfront restaurants. Interpretive access includes interpretive signs and literature, interpretive exhibits in a museum or elsewhere, as well as events such as tours and festivals (Rotenberg and McDonough, 1993). Public awareness and positive perceptions toward a water body emerge from the connections the public is able to make with the waterfront. Planners consider access most important in the early stages of a waterfront renewal because the positive public perceptions and support generated by the ability to access a waterfront are essential for a successful renewal process. (Krausse, 1985). A perception is the act of perceiving, a mental image, or an awareness of the elements of environment through physical sensation interpreted in the light of experience. Perceptions of aquatic environments depend on, not just salient features of water, but also on the relationship the water and the space immediately above the water’s surface have with their enclosing landform, vegetation, or structure (Pitt and David). An influential relationship exists among land use, public access, and public perceptions of urban waterfront, that together increase the livability of the waterfront (Agustina, 2004). The relationship can be captured in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Influential Relationship between Key Aspect in Urban Waterfront Planning - 184 -
Sustainable Future for Human Security (SustaiN’2010) 11-12 December 2010, Kyoto, Japan METHODOLOGY The research uses site and behavioral observations to collect information about land use, pedestrian and vehicular traffic, and physical features in the area, followed by pedestrian interviews using questioner to gather information on reason of presence in the area, perception towards the river’s features and recommendation for future area development. The area was observed and information was recorded during series of typical walk along the riverfront access road or path that takes about 30 minutes each from Pante Perak Bridge to Peunayong Bridge. The six observation times representing different situation during typical day and typical week are weekday morning or early noon, late afternoon, Friday early noon, Friday late afternoon, weekend early noon, and weekend late afternoon. Data set collected in 2004 is compared with data of 2010. Analysis is made based on the comparison as well as the relationship with key environmental aspects of the river.
Study Area
Figure 2. From Left :Study Area in downtown of Banda Aceh; Study Area with Pedestrian Generating Uses within walking distance R=0.75 km; approx 0.5 mile
The area selected for this study is the river segment in downtown area. It is about 1 km long and bounded physically by two downtown bridges namely Pante Pirak Bridge towards upstream and Peunayong Bridge towards downstream. Two historic urban centers are located on each side of this segment, giving a strong notion of downtown for local people. This area is physically and mentally considered as the main urban waterfront of Banda Aceh. This is a critical role as the city is aiming for a waterfront city image in the future.
Key Environmental Concerns related to the River Krueng Aceh River and its catchment area or watershed that covers area surrounding its major tributaries has been declared in a critical state due to illegal logging, forest burning and wild fire, quarry on the hill slope and in the river body, solid waste disposal, waste water from domestic, industry and agriculture (Development Alternative, Inc., 2006; Bapedalda, 2007). Local environmental agency also reports about decreasing water quality due to high e-coli bacteria content from domestic waste. Field observation in the study area also found many direct and untreated waste water discharge channels into the river. The impact of environmental degradation on the watershed area along the stream goes beyond the river. It relates to larger enviromental issues facing the province which are forest and natural resource conservation. The river is actually what connects the forest and nature beyond the city limit with the so called the urban life and urban people.
RESULTS Land Use Official land use map assigned this area mainly into major commercial category with few exception for offices and public institutional uses. This research recorded and classified actual land uses into finer scale of land uses such as commercial, residential, recreational, institutional, military - 185 -
Sustainable Future for Human Security (SustaiN’2010) 11-12 December 2010, Kyoto, Japan and industrial uses. Land use is further grouped into contributing and non contributing use for waterfront livability. Observation showed that land use type located along the riverfront in 2010 remain almost the same as in 2004. There are very few changes and are forced change due to damages by tsunami. Minor land uses or non contributing uses to support image of lively waterfront still exist in the area. Opportunities to change primary minor land uses during post tsunami rehabilitation and reconstruction have not been utilized to improve the image and quality of the urban riverfront. Water dependent uses are still scarce. Pedestrian generating uses are still few. Linkages to other pedestrian generating uses within walking distance is lacking. Complete land use in the study area is listed in Table 1.
Table 1 Uses in the Study Area and within Walking Distance Waterfront Land Use Presence of Use Non-dependent =ND, Non-related =NR = present, x = not present Dependent=D, Related= R = land use change D=cannot exist in any other location but on the Aceh Market Peunayong Market Outside The Study Area water, R= maybe located on or near the water But Within Walking for cost saving /revenues or uses attributed to Distance location , but could function away from the (approx<0.75km) waterfront 2004 2010 2004 2010 2004 2010 Commercial Uses Shophouse: Variety Shop ND, NR x x Shophouse: Office ND, NR x x Shophouse: Restaurant and R Café Mending and Sewing Shop ND, NR x x x x Hotel ND, NR Small Shopping Center ND, NR x x Theatre/Cinema ND, NR x x x x x Open Food Court R x x x x Street Vendor R x x
Residential Uses ND, NR
Institutional Uses Transit Center ND, NR x x x x Jail/Prison ND, NR x x x x x Banks ND, NR x x Gov Offices (Court and ND, NR x x Attorney Offices) Small Kindergarten ND, NR x x ? x Church Compound ND, NR x x x x Mosque Compound ND, NR x Sports Center ND, NR x x x x
Military Uses ND, NR x x
Open Spaces and Path R Plant Nursery, Small Park ND, R x x x Designated Parking ND, NR x ?
Industrial Uses Working Waterfront Boat/ Vessel Moorings D x x Fish Market R x x x x
- 186 -
Sustainable Future for Human Security (SustaiN’2010) 11-12 December 2010, Kyoto, Japan Accessibility Three type of access are observed namely physical access for pedestrian and vehicle, visual access and interpretive access. There are improvement of pedestrian access at some access points. However continuous linier access remain lacking even for a short walking distance. Approach towards provision of pedestrian path should consider linkage aspects between access points and uses. The same situation of discontinuous path also happen to other public facilities development in the city (Arafah, Agustina & Caisarina, 2010). In both 2004 and 2010 all type of vehicle is allowed to pass the area. The majority is land motorized vehicle, dominated by motorbike that contribute 46 % of total vehicle observed in 2004 and 61 % of total number of vehicle in 2010. High number of motorized vehicle contribute threats to pedestrian. There are very few water transportation vehicles. Pedestrian amenities improvement could be enhanced by combination of vehicles access control on limited period of time or on special occasions. Time proposed for implementation of vehicle access control are times with high pedestrian activity and type of vehicle to be controlled is motorcycle as the major contributor to heavy traffic.
Figure 3. Type and Number of Vehicle Observed during a Typical Walk between Two Bridges
Pedestrian Activities Total number of pedestrian observed in 2010 is less than in 2004. This could be attributed to the change of public transport route and street direction in the area. Number of people waiting for public transport or just passing through decrease while proportion of pedestrian sitting, chatting by the river and other river oriented activities are increasing. Distribution of pedestrian number between the two side of the riverfront area in 2010 remain imbalance as in 2004. Pedestrian is still heavily concentrated on Pasar Aceh side. There are more pedestrian on weekends in 2004 while in 2010 the distribution throughout the week is more balance. Lack of pedestrian on Peunayong side is due to in accessible area within military compound. The path stops at the military property fences therefore people wishing to walk along the river on this side will have to go off the embankment and into the river tide area or into the water. Distribution of pedestrian at various times during the day and week remai the same with an increase concentration during afternoon and weekend. Increase of pedestrian on week days afternoon in 2010 indicates the more active daily use of the waterfront area as a close to the city leisure destination. There are more than 20 kinds of pedestrian activities observed in both 2004 and 2010. However, water oriented activity such as boating or fishing are still limited and only observed on weekend. Pedestrian number and activities are presented in Figure 4.
- 187 -
Sustainable Future for Human Security (SustaiN’2010) 11-12 December 2010, Kyoto, Japan
Figure 4. Number of Pedestrian and Type of Activities Observed during a Typical Walk Survey
Visual Access The river can only be seen right from the riverside. The views towards the water and the waterfront from adjacent area or from walking distance points are lacking. The only view access point for public towards the water in 2004 from a distance was from the Grand Mosque Tower. Unfortunately up to 2010 it is still closed due to tsunami and earthquake tower damage. View preference of majority of building facade and opening in the area is not towards the river. The river is seen as backyard or unwanted view. The waterfront park and new restaurant are now starting to face towards the river but the number is still limited.
Figure 5. From left :View towards the river from the Mosque Tower in 2004 is no longer available; buildings blocking their street level view towards the river, 2010 and neglected view corridor, 2010.
Interpretive Access Interpretive access which is means to provide connection and information about the river features, or other related information is the worst among the three types of access observed. In 2004 there was no on-site or off-site information whatsoever about the river despite several key public locations and tourist destinations nearby. This situation has improved in 2010. Several signboards are up sharing information about plants, historic events and project conducted in the are. However, information about the river such as name of the river, the bridge`s name, the lenght, depth, water color, water quality, source of water, remain lacking. Basic information about the river features such as where the river get its water, why the colour change, lenght, even its history or contaminant content can be presented in the area, integrated - 188 -
Sustainable Future for Human Security (SustaiN’2010) 11-12 December 2010, Kyoto, Japan into the space design. Perceptions Forty seven and 48 pedestrians were interviewed in 2004 and 2010 respectively. Majority are adult male. There are less female and very few children or elderly. Inproportionate age distribution of pedestrian indicates that this area is still not accessible for all ages. The interview reveal positive change in term of perception towards function of the river. Previously the river is perceived as a big sewer. This has slightly decreasing. Natural or living function of the river now receives more appreciation.
Table 2. Perception Change on the Main Function of the River 2004 2010 Score Score Rank Function Type (%) Rank Function Type (%) 1 City sewer Utility 23.1 1 Source of living for fisherman Living 26 2 Source of living for fisherman Living 22.5 2 Leisure place for resident Leisure 20 3 Leisure place for resident Leisure 22.3 3 City Sewer Utility 18 4 Leisure place for tourists Leisure 14.6 4 Leisure place for tourist Leisure 15 5 Source of drinking water Living 14.4 5 Source of drinking water Living 12 6 Others Vary 3.1 6 Others Vary 9 n =47 n=48
The municipal government campaign on building an image of waterfront city seems to focus on the aspect of providing or building physical features and amenities while infact the main strength of the urban waterfront area is in the natural aspects as shown in Table 3. Although there is a change of priority, the most favorable features in 2004 and 2010 are natural features which are water tranquility and plants. Increase preferences towards plants in 2010 could be attributed to the newly established small waterfront park and nursery on Aceh Market Side.
Table 3. Change of Perception towards Favorable Features Along the Riverfront
2004 2010 Rank Features Score (%) No Features Score (%) 1 Tranquility of flowing water 30.39 1 Plant/greenery along the river 41 2 Plants/greenery along the river 22.12 2 Tranquility of flowing water 30 3 Ability to use the access road 17.23 3 Ability to use access road 11 4 Fisherman life/port activities 12.07 4 Watersport 7 5 The shops along the river 10.05 5 Fisherman life/port activities 6 6 Water sports 3.6 6 Others 4 7 Others 7 Shops along the river 1
Figure 6. Favorable Features ; Plants or Greenery and Tranquility of Flowing Water (2010)
Trash and water quality are still consider as the main unfavorable features or main concern along the riverfront area while pedestrian improvement has lessen the concern over lack of pedestrian. - 189 -
Sustainable Future for Human Security (SustaiN’2010) 11-12 December 2010, Kyoto, Japan These concerns are more on the natural environmental quality rather than on built environment features such as restaurant or souvenir shops. Further inquiries on the issues of water quality in the public term relates to turbidity, colour, and visually visible waste rather than water quality in term of contaminant content which infact is at critical level.
Table 4. Change of Perception towards Unfavorable Features Along the River 2004 Dislikes 2010 Dislikes Rank Features Score Rank Features Score 1 Trash/Garbage 29.6(%) 1 Trash/Garbage 38(%) 2 Water quality 17.8 2 Water quality 30 3 Lack of pedestrian path 16.8 3 Flood 10 4 Flood 13.9 4 Traffic 5 5 Traffic 9.8 5 Lack of pedestrian path 5 6 Lack of quality eateries 9.0 6 Lack of quality eateries 4 7 Othersteries 3.1 7 Others 7
Recommendation Although there are some improvements, the quality of Aceh riverfront area as an urban public space is still low as shown by the present of non contributing uses in the area and the failure to take opportunity to introduce new contributing uses when one primary non contributing uses whish is the prison was damaged by tsunami and then rebuilt elsewhere. Physical access quality improvements are dicontinuous and lacking connectivity to each other and disconnected with pedestrian generating uses within walking distance from the area. Provision of visual access points or view corridors beyond areas adjacent to the water are very feasible as many alleys especially along the Peunayong Market are currently undeveloped. Signage directing movement towards the riverside should be established in public spaces within walking distance from the river. New development or refurnish of existing buildings should be encouraged to face towards the riverside not backing off the riverside. The quality of interpretive access is very low therefore specific signage and information about the river environmental aspect should be provided along the waterfront. Campaign and information dissemination about the rivers role and environmental quality should be conducted on a regular basis either through on site program such as tours, festivals, or off site program such as leaflet distribution, educational program. The urban waterfront space should not be treated merely as tourist destination but more as a day to day recreational or escape from hectic urban dynamics space for local resident. The space role is to balance the dense urban area surroundings it. With this role in mind, natural features should be highlighted and conserved instead of bringing too much active role /commercial uses such as street vendor. Activity such as festivals or occasional event is still allowed from time to time.
Conclusion Future policies and urban design projects addressing the urban riverfront issues in this area or elsewhere should use a more comprehensive understanding of the waterfront dynamics. Interrelationship between land use, access and perception of the riverside could strategically be used in urban waterfront sustainability program. This study provides preliminary insight into the matter and could direct further required study and project development.
References
[1] Agustina, S.,2009, Perception as Influencing Factor in Urban Waterfront Planning, Proceeding International Conference on Built Environment in Developing Countries, University Sains Malaysia, Penang [2] Arafah, Y., Agustina, S., Caisarina, I., 2010, Revitalization of Heritage Areas in Downtown Banda Aceh as Interconnected Open Space based on Linkage System, Proceeding International Conference on Aceh Development, Kuala Lumpur [3] Breen, Ann., Rigby, Dick .,1984, Waterfronts Cities Reclaim Their Edge, McGraw-Hill, NY - 190 -
Sustainable Future for Human Security (SustaiN’2010) 11-12 December 2010, Kyoto, Japan [4] Directorate of Urban and Rural Planning., 1998, Guidelines for Waterfront Cities Development in Indonesia, Dept of Public Work, Jakarta [5] Development Alternative, Inc., 2005, Sampling and Analysis Plan for Ground Water and Surface Water Sampling in Krueng Aceh Basin, Survey Plan, Environmental Services Program-United States Agency for International Development (ESP-USAID), Jakarta [6] Development Alternative, Inc., 2006, Preliminary Survey of Krueng Aceh Watershed Areas, Survey Report, Environmental Services Program-United States Agency for International Development (ESP-USAID), Jakarta [7] Development Alternative, Inc., Water Quality Monitoring and Hydrochemical Loading Study, Banda Aceh, 2007, Environmental Services Program- Services Program-United States Agency for International Development (ESP-USAID), Jakarta [8] Goodwin, R.F., Good, J.W., Waterfront Revitalization for Small Cities, 1990, Oregon State University [9] Haider, Josef.,2006., Environmental Aspects of Reconstruction in Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam Province (Indonesia) Two Years after the Tsunami-Brown Environmental Issues, United Nations Environment Program, Jakarta [10] Krausse, G.H., 1985, Tourism and Waterfront Renewal: Assessing Residential Perception in Newport, Rhode Island, USA, Ocean & Coastal Management, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp. 179-203, Elsevier Science Ltd [11] Marshall, Richard., 2001, Waterfronts in Post Industrial Cities, Spon Press, NY [12] Otto, Betsy., McCormick, Kathleen., and Leccese, Michael., 2004, Ecological Riverfront Design: Restoring rivers, Connecting Communities, American Planning Association [13] Rotenberg, R., Mc Donough, G., 1993, The Cultural Meaning of Urban Space, Bergin & Garvey, Wesport [14] Sea Defense Consultant., 2009, Hydrological Monitoring Network for the Aceh River [15] Torre, L. Azeo., 1989 Waterfront Development , Van Nostrand Reinhold, NY [16] Wren, Douglas M., 1983, Urban Waterfront Development, The Urban Land Institutez
- 191 -