Spatial Patterns Architecture on The Productive Society (Case Study: Public Space in Pujasera PIM, North Aceh)
Keywords:
Public space, productive society, spatial pattern, activity pattern, pujaseraAbstract
Rapid urban development increases the intensity of activities that require places to facilitate them, especially public spaces. This research examines the spatial pattern of public space architecture in Pujasera PIM, North Aceh, focusing on its role in productive communities functioning as a communal dining area. With the emergence of Society 5.0, Pujasera has transitioned from a culinary destination to a gathering place for productive activities. This research aims to understand the spatial transition and activity patterns in Pujasera PIM, taking into account the needs and orientation of its visitors, using a qualitative exploratory method, combining Erik H. Erikson's life cycle theory and Norberg Schulz's geometric properties of boundaries, extent, enclosure, center, and figure-ground. The physical space of the Pujasera PIM was analyzed, highlighting its spatial organization and activities. The results show the dynamic nature of the pujasera architecture that accommodates different age groups and activities. Geometric properties play an essential role in shaping spatial patterns, and visitor characteristics influence the design and functionality of the space. The study concludes that Pujasera PIM architecture is vital in creating a productive and inclusive society, maximizing human potential, and improving overall well-being.
Downloads
References
Amalia, F., FA, W. F., & Komariah, S. L. (2021). Karakteristik pengguna ruang terbuka publik pada Taman Kota di Palembang. NALARs, 20(2), 73.
Andi Halim, H. (2016). Analisa ruang publik koridor Jalan Ratulangi di Makassar. LOSARI : Jurnal Arsitektur Kota Dan Pemukiman, 29–33.
Brown, F. E. (1997). Space is the machine : a configurational theory of architecture. In Design Studies (Vol. 18, Issue 3).
Carmona, M., Heath, T., Oc, T., & Tiesdell, S. (2003). Public places : Urban spaces (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4324/9780080515427
Cooper, R., Evans, G., & Boyko, C. (2018). Designing sustainable cities. Wiley.
Deni, D., Heria Lestari, W., Muliana, E., & Nasruddin, N. (2021). Identification of public green open space in The Merdeka Square Area of Binjai City: Social reality architecture. International Journal of Engineering, Science and Information Technology, 2(1), 100–109. https://doi.org/10.52088/ijesty.v2i1.210
Erikson, E. H., & Erikson, J. M. (1982). The life cycle completed. W.W. Norton.
Ernawati, J., Putri, A. Y., & Ramdani, S. (2017). Pola aktivitas pada ruang publik Taman Trunojoyo Malang. Jurnal Mahasiswa Jurusan Arsitektur Universitas Brawijaya, 5(4), 1–8. http://arsitektur.studentjournal.ub.ac.id
Fakhriansyah, M., Fathimahhayti, L. D., & Gunawan, S. (2022). Kriteria redesain pola penataan Pujasera Stadion Bandung berdasarkan aktivitas dan perilaku pengguna. G-Tech : Jurnal Teknologi Terapan, 6(2), 295–305.
Gehl, J. (2010). Cities for people. In Island Press.
Gehl, J. (2012). Life between buildings: Using public space. Island Press.
Hantono, D. (2019). Kajian perilaku pada ruang terbuka publik. NALARs, 18(1), 45.
Iqbal, M., Hidayat, W., & Susilawati, M. D. (2019). Pusat jajanan serba ada (Pujasera) dengan pendekatan arsitektu tepian air. Jom FTEKNIK, 6, 654–663.
Jayasundara, N., & Botheju, P. (2016). Spatial patterns and human behaviours : A study of Urban Public Space in Kandy. Proceedings of the International Conference on ’Cities, People and Places’- ICCPP, 1–15.
Karsono, B., Wahid, J., Novianti, Y., Nurhaiza, & Soraya, M. H. (2020). Place attachment in public space case study: Hiraq Square Lhokseumawe Aceh - Indonesia. 195(Hunian 2019), 46–50. https://doi.org/10.2991/aer.k.200729.008
Lynch, K. (1960). The image of the city. The MIT Press.
Maghfirah, N. U. R., Arsitektur, P. S., Teknik, F., & Malikussaleh, U. (2022). Fenomena taman sari Kota Banda Aceh. SNFT Unimal 2022, 225–235.
Montgomery, C. (2013). Happy city : Transforming our lives through urban design. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Nzewi, N. U., & Ifebi, O. (2017). Activity as a key factor in space design. Tropical Built Environemt Journal (TBEJ), December 2016.
Rapoport, A. (2006). Culture, architecture, and design. Locke Science Publishing Company.
Schulz, N., & Christian. (1974). Existence, space, and architecture. Praeger.
Schulz, N., & Christian. (1980). Genius loci : Towards A phenomenology of architecture. Rizzoli.
Singh, A. (2021). An introduction to experimental and exploratory research. SSRN Electronic Journal, January. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3789360
Sushanti, I. R., Yuniati, S. R., & Angelia, T. (2021). Eksistensi ruang publik menghadapi transformasi penggunaan ruang di permukiman kota. Region : Jurnal Pembangunan Wilayah Dan Perencanaan Partisipatif, 16(2), 186.
Talen, E. (2012). Design for diversity: Exploring socially mixed neighbourhoods. Routledge.
Weisman, G. D. (1981). Man environment relations. Journal of Man-Environment Relations, 1(2).
Wener, R. E., Evans, G. W., & Phillips, D. (2003). Environmental effects on health and well-being: How we shape our built and natural environments. Wiley.
Whyte, W. H. (1980). The social life of small urban spaces (1st ed.). Conservation Foundation.
Wibowo, P. M., Hardiman, G., & Suprapti, A. (2020). Pengaruh ruang terbuka publik di Perumnas Tlogosari Semarang. E-Journal Undip, 20(1), 18–27.
Wicaksono, A. A., & Trisnawati, E. (2014). Teori interior. Jakarta : Griya Kreasi.
Yadav, D. (2022). Criteria for good qualitative research: A comprehensive review. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 31(6), 679–689.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
