KEPADATAN KOTA DALAM PERSPEKTIF PEMBANGUNAN (TRANSPORTASI) BERKELANJUTAN

Bambang Haryadi, Bambang Riyanto

Abstract


The development of a city usually is accompanied by traffic congestion and air pollution problems. The appropriate strategy to solve these problems has been debated for long time. The proponents of new urbanism believe that the problem can be improved by forcing more people and more cars into smaller areas . They assume that by forcing densities higher, public transit can be provided better and more efficient, so that people will be more inclined to abandon their automobiles and use public transit, bicycles or walking as an alternative. On the contrary, anti-urban traditions believe that densifying urban areas will only worsen traffic congestion, and in turn will worsen air pollution. So that the best approach to solving the problem would to let urban sprawl, to disperse
traffic and to make it move faster. This paper describes both approaches and the impacts, and discuses which one is the best from Indonesian perspective.

Keywords: urban density, urban sprawl, new urbanism, smart growth


Perkembangan kota biasanya dibarengi dengan masalah kemacetan lalu-lintas dan polusi udara. Strategi apa yang harus ditempuh untuk mengatasi hal tersebut merupakan perdebatan yang panjang. Para pendukung new urbanism percaya bahwa kemacetan dan polusi bisa ditanggulangi dengan memaksakan lebih banyak orang dan kendaraan dalam kawasan yang sempit. Dengan lebih terkonsentrasi, penyediaan angkutan umum bisa lebih baik dan efisien, sehingga orang akan mengurangi penggunaan kendaraan pribadi  dan cenderung menggunakan angkuatan umum, bersepeda atau berjalan kaki. Sebaliknya budaya suburban dengan gagasan urban sprawl menganggap bahwa kemacetan disebabkan karena terlalu banyaknya kendaraan di wilayah yang sempit, dan pada gilirannya kemacetan memperparah polusi. Oleh karena itu kota harus dibiarkan berkembang menyebar, untuk menyebar lalu-lintas. Tulisan ini membahas kedua pandangan tentang kepadatan kota, dampaknya, serta mengkajinya dalam perperktif geografis dan
demografis, yang manakah yang terbaik untuk Indonesia.


Kata Kunci: kepadatan kota, pemekaran kota, new urbanism, pertumbuhan cerdas


Full Text:

PDF

References


Cilia, George. 1993. “Population, Households and Urban Density”, Options Mediterraneennes, Ser. B / n 7, 1993 –

Malta: Food, Agriculture, Fisheries and the Environment.

Cox, Wendell. 2000. How Urban Density Intensifies Traffic Congestion And Air Pollution. Goldwater Institute, Arizona

Issue Analysis 162, October 2000.

Congress for the new Urbanism (CNU). 2002. “Charter of the new urbanism,”

Available: http://ww.cnu.org/aboutcnu/index.cfm?fo rmaction=charter&CFID=1778105&CFT OKEN=35528783. Accessed 9/25/06.

Gielge, Johannes. 2004. Urban Desity, Quality of Life and Sustainable Mobility. TRB 2004 Annual Meeting.

Handy, Susan. 2002. Smart Growth and The Transportation-Land Use Connection: What Does the Research Tell Us?

Paper prepared for “New Urbanism and Smart Growth: A research Sysmposium” University of Maryland, May 3, 2002.

Hui, S. C.M.. 2000. Low Energy Building Design in High Density Urban Cities. Paper submitted to World Renewable Energy

Congress VI, 1-7 July 2000, Brighton, UK.

Rahman, Mahbubur. 2001. “Tall Structures and Housing in the Developing World: Tradeoffs Between Density and Cost”,

CTBUH Review, Vol. 1, No. 3: Fall 2001.

Ransford, Bob. 2005. “Even in an Empty Country, High Density Makes Sense”, Vancouver Sun, July 23, 2005.

Schwanen, T. dan P.L. Mokhtarian. 2003. “Does Dissonance Between Desired And Current Residential Neighbourhood

Type Affect Individual Travel Behaviour? An Empirical Assessment From The San Francisco Bay Area”, Proceeding of

the European Transport ConferenceI (ETC), October 8-10, 2003, Strasbourg, France.

Zwirn, Robert. Is Desity Possible?. Online: www.architects.org/emplibrary/Density.Z wirn.pdf.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.15294/jtsp.v9i2.1611

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.