URBAN HERITAGE CONSERVATION IN INDONESIA1

Experiences from the inner-city of Bandung and Jakarta Kota

Dr.-Ing. Widjaja Martokusumo
Centre for Urban Design Studies, Department of Architecture, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Indonesia
e-mail: wmart@psud.ar.itb.ac.id

CURRENT ISSUES ON URBAN CONSERVATION

This paper is particularly concerned with phenomena and tendencies of practices
of urban conservation and inner-city revitalisation. It argues that urban development and
conservation is a process of cultural appraisal. From actual conditions of urban
development in Indonesia the discussion tries to elaborate the initial bases of the urban
conservation in revitalisation scheme. Furthermore, it will also discuss the role of planning
regarding the important interaction between built-environment and cultural processes. Two
focal issues should be clearly revealed as a red line in the discussion.
The first issue deals with the emerging role of old inner-city district. Besides the
increasing awareness of socio-ecological aspects in town planning, there is also a gradual
shift of interest in terms of its historical potentials. The discourse on future development of
such district in urban development has been a leading subject. This is not merely related
with the economic potentials, but it is based upon another central issue i.e. the identity
making as well (C. Abel, 1994; H. Bhme, 1998). Present practices, however, demonstrate
that the efforts on urban conservation -due to the institutional weakness, financial and
technical insufficiency- are still limited as well. It is evident, that conservation is not yet
integrated with the overall urban development scheme. Thus, current improvements for
urban structures by enhancing the significance of urban milieus as a cultural environment
must still be in many ways elaborated.
The second issue is addressed to a new understanding in terms of functional role
of urban areas, especially the inner-city district. Since, at least, the last two decades such
a topic has been discussed in context of urban planning, urbanisation and economic
development in Third World countries. It refers particularly to the existence of urban
housing or inner-city Kampung. Such traditional urban housing in their socio-economic
scheme should not be conceived as a deteriorating inner-city housing any more. In fact,
urban Kampungs play functionally a special role as a working neighbourhood (S. Krtke,
1991). The fundamental change on that point of view was directly affected by the emerging
urban management paradigm in the mid of 1980s. In its essence, it concentrates on
endeavours to enforce the capability of urban areas with theirs autonomy policy regarding
to urbanisation trends and economic growth, so that the problems of infrastructure and the
reduction of urban poor could be properly solved.

Paper presented for the International Workshop on The Indonesian City Revisited, Institute of
Social and Cultural Studies, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Rijksuniversiteit Leiden,
The Netherlands, 6-8 December, 2000. This paper has been published as, Urban heritage
conservation: Experiences in Bandung and Jakarta in Peter J.M. Nas (ed.): The Indonesian Town
Revisited, pp. 374-389, LIT Verlag-Institute of Asian Studies, Mnster/Singapore 2002 (ISBN 981230-184-4)

Even conservation and revitalisation have become important issues in urban

development politics until the present time, there is, however, still a vague of readiness in
the society. In my conviction there is a need to pay more attention concerning with the
rapid social changes to comprehensive cultural discussion.
MODERNISATION AND URBANITY IN INDONESIA
The Indonesian cities, like those in African, Latin American and/or other Asian
countries, are facing the rapid pace of industrialisation and social changes
(modernisation). In post-War Asia, modernisation has always been associated with
urbanisation, revitalisation of the inner-city and redevelopment of the traditional cities (H.R. Korff, 1996). Therefore, the problems of urban development in Indonesia are commonly
characterised by growth of population (pseudo urbanisation), lack of infrastructures,
decaying the quality of urban environment, economic development/market demand and
institutional weakness (I. Serageldin, 1997). As a result, they have led to uncontrolled
urban development. In short, the process of modernisation has also direct impacts on
social and environmental issues in urban areas.
In course of urban development, inadequate infrastructure, declining inner-city
district, economic demands and low public awareness of urban milieus have put inevitably
pressures to inner-city housing (urban Kampung). Meanwhile, the degradation of the old
urban milieu gives a little chance for a growing, shifting homeless population/urban poor to
take root and establish community with a minimum standard of descent housing. Despite
of the amount of such housing typology (1998, ca. 65 %; 1983, ca. 70% of urban
population in Indonesia), the overall scheme of urban development policy and strategy are
still carried out without a closer examination of such urban housing (G.W. Jones/P. Visaria
(eds.), 1997).
Parallel to the housing problem, the inner-city has always been confronting with the
rampant building speculation that is a result of economic pressure and commercial
demands. In line with economic development and modernisation, the energy and
resources of the architectural profession have inevitably focused on the modern sector.
The expansion of commercial districts (CBD) through revitalisation and redevelopment
which is accompanied by the dynamic of real-estate speculations, displacement,
densification, economic activities and social impact, has put undoubtedly tremendous
pressure on the city as a whole. Due to the Minderwertigkeitskomplexe the equating of
progress with westernisation has been also evident at national level (Soedjatmoko, 1984).
Inevitably, the modernisation causes a deterioration of traditional and historic urban areas,
which are often loci of invaluable architectural heritage (I. Serageldin, 1997). It is, also, not
surprising therefore that conservation of the traditional historic urban areas was
considered sentimental, irrational and even anti-progress (development).
In line with the urbanity of Indonesian city, we can conclude some characteristics
as follows:
First, the spatial segregation, as a product of classification social structure, that can be
seen on the urban fabrics. A closer look at segregation as such reveals, that the current
nations growth, and the planning/design processes associated with them, brought about
new opportunities for many people, but in many ways does not pay enough attention to the
majority of traditional urban sector. Not surprisingly, the high-rise modern structures are

standing side by side with the traditional low-rise, and this has led evidently to a
typological contrast. Such urban and rural dichotomy has been accompanied the image of
urban development in Indonesia.
Furthermore, the radical change of planning culture and modern building processes
give another image of monotony in urban structures. As stated above, in the pace of rapid
modernisation many of historic urban artefacts with their architectural heritage were
demolished and radically replaced by the new structures. The tabula rasa urban
development and revitalisation could be a serious threat for the existence urban culture,
that was integrated the urban artefacts and the social structure as well. It is inevitable, that
practices of urban renewal project with their large scale redevelopment concept have
driven away the local population (gentrification). The major reason lies in the urban
development politic, in which the considerations and priority only happened to the
economic globalisation and market demands (modern sector), which cause undoubtedly
not only relocation, displacement and marginalisation of urban poor, but also serious
destruction of historic urban artefacts. Subsequently, the inner-city areas have lost its
significance as well as its functional urban structure.
The discussion on urban development in Indonesia recognises the problem as
follow: the current urban development approach, in which the planning processes
associated with them, does not proportionally pay attention to the existing urban structure
and archaeological features, be that social, economic, cultural and politic. Thus, a search
for more careful approach and understanding of the big picture is imperative. That
indicates a need of substantial and procedural improvement in terms of urban
development. As Badshah argued (1997), new models have begun to emerge particularly
in the organisational development field, that can allow us to re-evaluate the problemsolving approach with an appreciate inquiry approach. Appreciate inquiry focuses on
building capacity, valuing the strongest features of community under consideration,
envisioning what might be,' discussing what should be and achieving innovative solutions
for the urban conservation (development).
LESSONS FROM TWO CITIES
Bandung: A City in Change
The capital city of West Java is situated about 180 km in the south east direction
from Jakarta away. The administrative area of Bandung comprises ca. 160 km2 and
nowadays Bandung belongs to the third biggest town in Indonesia with its population over
2.9 million (1994). According to historical records, in the year of 1641 Bandung has
already been known as a small village, called Negorij Bandoeng or West Oedjoeng Broeng
(H. Kunto, 1984). The process of transformation and development of this small traditional
settlement was initiated during the ruling general governor Willem Daendles (1808-1811).
Bandung was also famous for its plantation area, which is situated nearby the city.
The growth was in many ways accelerated after Bandung had administratively been
established as a stadsgemeente in 1906. The other striking force in urban development
was the idea from the colonial power to move the capital city of the Netherlands East
Indies from the decayed Batavia to the hilly, green and hygienic Bandung. By the year of

1930 Bandung became already the fourth important town in Java after Batavia, Surabaya
and Semarang.
After the independence (1945) Bandung played an important role in political
history. The first Asia-Africa conference was held in Bandung 1955 which was attended by
the Non-Block Nations. The modernisation period was commenced in 1960. Respectively
the Soekarnos Nation Building had also a great impact on the city development in
Bandung. Following in the period of the 1970s development process was encouraged by
the oil export. The urban development was in many cases stressed on city infrastructures.
The period of 1980s was called as a shock period, which had a great impact of the urban
development in Bandung. During the difficult times it was recorded, that a piece meal land
acquisition took place mostly in the periphery of Bandung. The city expansion to the east
took place in 1985 which main issue was to provide more lands for housing.
The period of the 1990s was recorded with the dynamic economic growth that led
to construction boom. Not surprisingly, market oriented development, such as new office
buildings, banks, modern shopping malls, inter-continental services and luxurious
housings (real-estate projects) was then prominent. In succeeding years the euphorical
urban development took place until the economic crisis and political turbulence hit the
whole country in 1997.
The Old Bragas Quarter. A Historical Overview
The Bragas quarter belongs to one of the prominent sites in the inner-city of
Bandung. The quarter covers the Jalan Braga or known as Braga Weg and the Braga
Kampung, a traditional settlement, which is surrounded by the perimeter block of
structures of Braga street and Banceuy street. The Braga street is situated near of AlunAlun (the traditional open space) in the heart of Bandung City and used to be a well known
shopping street in the colonial time (H. Kunto, 1984). The street is morphologically divided
into three segments. The first segment runs between Asia-Afrika street and ABC
street/Naripan street, the second, which is the longest part (ca. 400 m) runs between the
ABC street/Naripan street and Suniaradja street/Lembong street, and the last segment of
the Braga street runs between the Suniaradja street/Lembong street and the Gereja
street/Perintis Kemerdekaan street.
In the early development (19th century), both sites along the street were then still
empty and only a few landhouses could be found. At the end of the 19th century the street
became already one of the important streets in Bandung which played an important role as
connecting road between the south and the north part of the city. The realisation of
expansion plan of North Bandung (1917) gave impulse for new development. Due to the
growth of the city, in the period of 1930s, an urban renewal project for that area was
initiated to improve the quality of urban realm. In line with the urban development buildings
with different functions and new urban infrastructures were erected. The renewal,
however, had resulted in fundamental changes of the morphological structures. The open
structures were then replaced by the closed ones. Respectively such changes were
followed by the Gesamtcharakter of the Braga street per se. The architecture of the
buildings (mostly two-storey shophouses) along that street which came into existence in
the period from 1920 till 1940, varies from the Indisch, a mix of Traditional (Javanese)European Style, Modern Style or the so called Neues Bauen, Functionalism, Art-Deco until
the pure European style architecture. One decade after that first renewal, precisely in the

1940s, the Braga street became already a well known shopping street in the whole the
Netherlands East Indies and served then as a community centre for the Europeans (H.
Kunto, 1984).
Nowadays, the famous Braga street had lost its vitality and dynamic. The functional
role of shopping street has been replaced by the existence of the modern shopping malls
long ago, which were basically derived from Americans model. Some of the old structures,
however, are still relatively intact. Urbanisation, social changes in terms of life style, rapid
pace of modernisation and lack of understanding old urban heritage have given immense
pressures in the last of ten years and a broad way for the demolition of historic structures.
Another striking issue regarding the heritage structures deals with the urban
transportation. With the increasing pressures of urban public transportation the
construction of flyover and widening the existing road has always been seen as an
appropriate solution.
Revitalisation and Notions of Conservation of Bragas Quarter
The conservation efforts, which was a part of revitalisastion scheme of the innercity distirct, were first commenced in the beginning of 1980s. The notions of conservation
were since then discussed further on and apparently resulted in a co-operation between
the City Planning Office (Dinas Tata Kota) from the municipality of Bandung and Bandung
Heritage Society (Paguyuban Pelestarian Budaya Bandung). The latter is a social
initiative, consists mainly of citizens of Bandung with diverse background and career, but
have the same interests on cultural activities and preservation issues. The scope of works
focused on identifying and classifying all structures and buildings, which were considered
to be culturally and historically significant.
After a long interval, the issues of revitalisation of Bragas quarter emerged in the
year of 1996 into discussions. Besides the discussions on the future Braga, a new
assessment of the physical development should be carried out in order to promote the
tourism activities in Bandung and West Java. According to regional development policy,
the city of Bandung will be developed as the main tourist destination in West Java.
Therefore, a proper physical improvement should anticipate all significant places in
Bandung, including the Braga street, which can play a great role in tourisms industry.
The revitalisation of the 1990s was designed in principle to be based upon the
public-private mechanism developed. Moreover, the revitalisation scheme consists of two
different areas of physical improvements. The first area concentrated on the conservation
of historic urban artefacts and any valuable and significant archaeological features along
the Braga street. The other should cover the Kampung Braga, which is situated in the west
side of the Braga street. The existing urban settlement will be integrated in the
revitalisation scheme. In its realisation the mostly two storey of Kampungs structures will
be replaced by vertical apartment (Rumah Susun). In such a way, more open spaces
through a restructuring the parcels and infrastructures could be gained, while the density
could still be increased. Furthermore, along the Cikapundung River, promenades of each
riverside will be built.
In line with the new road construction and physical improvements of promenade
Cikapundung River, a grand double boulevard, which original plan dated from the year
1938, came into vehement discussions. It was also convinced, that the new road

construction along the waterfront would give contributions in terms of accessibility and
open space. Apart from such argument, the crucial question whether such physical
intervention could minimise the social cost as well, had still been open. Experiences
shows, that new road construction has consequently an increasing of the traffic flow on the
area. Furthermore, such approach indicates that the social impact in terms of
gentrification, relocation and resettlement would hardly be avoided. Finally, the idea to
clear up the Cikapundung area and the new road construction (promenade) have
apparently been dropped in favour of another solution, at least for the time being.
The economic crisis and political turbulence, beginning from the year 1997, had
brought dilemmatic circumstances for construction investments. The most striking issues
happened after the Suhartos resignation on May 21, 1998 has been dealing with the
economical and political instability. This situation has a great impact on tourisms business
in the whole country. Especially in Bandung, due to such critical conditions the occupancy
rate of hotels had drastically got dropped from 70% to 10%.
Cultural tourism, which focuses on historic districts and significant artefacts in
urban areas Bandung had then been believed to be an important alternative in order to
stabilize the local economical incomes. Together with technical and substantial assistance
from the Bandung Heritage Society various action plans on urban conservation focusing
on the inner-city of Bandung were developed. The old Bragas quarter was then chosen
and introduced as a pilot project. The whole studies and researches, which had been long
abandoned and forgotten, became a major discussion in the beginning of 1998. Several
workshops on physical improvements of significant buildings and structures on the Braga
street were carried out and public discussions with the Bragas community were
respectively established. The next step of conservation actions was done by removing
signage and returning the facade back into the original condition. In short, some small
scale restoration (beautification) had been done. Besides the physical aspects workshop
activities indicates the need of socialisation programme for the neighbourhood. This
should be seen as a trigger to stimulate the public interests and public awareness.
Therefore, the local government Bandung through their special task-forces had done some
socialisation in kind of bazaar activities, such as Braga Kaget (June 1998) and Flower
Festival Braga (August 1998).
Despite the conservation had been important issues on urban development in
Bandung since the mid of 1980s, the realisation of protecting heritage structures at Braga
street took more than a decade of time. It was also clear, that the driving forces in that
conservation actions were still mainly dominated by economic motives. Obviously, there
was still huge local problems, including the social and ecological improvements within the
framework of revitalisation efforts. Anyway there was no following action plans on how to
define a socio-cultural based approach regarding the conservation of Braga area which will
and should integrate the existing Kampung Braga into the whole revitalisation scheme.
Urban Heritage Jakarta Kota
The urban heritage Jakarta Kota with its complexities has always been a prime
concern in course of urban development for more than two decades. When we talk about
Jakarta Kota, the memory will bring us to some urban areas in the northern part of Jakarta.
The historic district Old Batavia, which played still in the beginning of the twentieth-century
an important role as economic and political centre of the Netherlands East Indies, just like

what Breuning (1954) described in his book Het voormalige Batavia, een hollandse
stedesichting in de tropen, is now slowly fading away.
Actually, the revitalisation Jakarta Kota efforts had been introduced for several
times. The first revitalisation effort, which featuring the conservation district approach had
been begun since 27 years ago. The unique old district of Jakarta with nearly 120 historic
intact structures, including some prominent areas such as Kali Besar, Fatahillah square,
fish market, Sunda Kelapa port, the outlook tower, the old typical Holland bridge, the
Chinatown Glodok and some old godowns of a former Hollands trading company-VOC,
was then decided to be conserved. Such decision was socially and economically difficult
since at that time, the country was still in the recovery period. Obviously, conservation of
historic urban artefacts was not regarded as prime major in the urban development and
infrastructure development in the early of 1970s. Despite such difficulties, the conservation
movement was politically supported by the local city enactment.
The major concern with the conservation problem in Jakarta Kota was how to
protect the heritage structures, despite of the rapid urban development. In such a way, it
was hoped that the continuity of urban development with its long history could still be
accommodated and facilitated. Furthermore, such (historic) preservation efforts could
make significant contributions in awakening and developing public awareness of the long
struggle of Indonesias independence history and nations pride as well. The conservation
activities mainly adopted the western based concept of preservation district in Jakarta
Kota. Together with the historical potentials of the site some areas were designated as
museum district, especially the area around Fatahillah square, a group of Pakhuizen
adjacent to the fish market and outlook tower were then transformed into Fatahillah
Museum and Maritime Museum through adaptive-reuse mechanism. It was recorded that
great efforts were made to integrate the revitalisation efforts with the idea of developing
Jakarta Kota as a tourism destination and accommodated the role of commercials through
mixed use urban development.
Despite of the revitalisation scheme, the implementation of all great plans were not
properly supported by the resource management and development. Lack of funding had
apparently been one of the major problems. The revitalisation effort of the 1970s was
mainly funded by an international grant on urban development project. The sustainability of
the physical improvement, therefore, had a great dependency of the continuity of funding
programme. After the contract was over, there was hardly significant intervention. Of
course, some quality improvements (beautification) were made, but not for the whole
conservation area. The physical improvement such as small scale reconstruction of
Fatahillah square (it was used as an open parking area), the beautification of the area of
Kali Besar, the transformation of Justice Building into Museum of Fine Art adjacent to the
Museum Fatahillah. Another striking difficulty went back to the management of area
Jakarta Kota, which administratively divided into several different local authority.
Mismanagement and lack of co-ordination among those local authorities were in many
cases admitted one of the main institutional weaknesses. In short, many basic ideas and
ambitious programme were not adequately and satisfactorily elaborated into realistic
action plans.
After a long break, the issue of revitalisation of Jakarta Kota rolled on again and
had a come-back in the period of 1990s. Despite market demands, the revival driving force
was almost the same with the previous revitalisation, how to protect heritage structures,
while accommodating new urban functions. The notions of conservation were developed to

anticipate new urban development due to the construction boom, which began in the
early years of the 1990s. At the same time it tried to promote the maritime tourism through
the jargon Rebirth of Sunda Kelapa. The renaissance of history in revitalisation scheme
was accompanied by the increasing issues on social sensitiveness and ecological
consideration (Bhme, 1998).
Like its predecessor, the notions of conservation were also integrated with the
revitalisation scheme. Other important development issues, which should be embraced on
revitalisation programmes varied from providing of new infrastructure, mixed-use
development, traffic regulations, minimising social impacts and ecological improvement
(flood, waste management and air pollution). In other words the conservation approach in
that revitalisation scheme was gradually designed to make contributions to local social and
related environmental problems.
A comprehensive analyse regarding the revitalisation strategy were only partial
implemented. The realisation of conservation had focused merely on some single buildings
and structures, which economically direct contributions in terms of private investment and
property development. The modernisation through maximalizing the density (FAR-floor
area ratio) and the redevelopments scheme with tendency of tabula rasa development,
has always been one of the adopted strategies. Furthermore, a more clearly business
oriented urban redevelopment was still dominated the whole scheme of improvement
quality assessment. Despite existing morphological structures, the new fly-over (Harbour
Road) construction, which divided the old historic district, had led to other severe
problems. Not only the demolition of archaeological features kept continue, but new
neglected urban spaces under the flyover and spatial segregation/fragmentation are
consequently the result of unresponsive urban infrastructure development.
Today, the historic district Jakarta Kota is still fighting with some environmental
issues. The latter encompasses traffic jam, flood, waste management, demolition and legal
aspects. Only a few of important plans from the second revitalisation scheme could be
realised. The long economic crisis had been one of constraints for the whole the
conservation plans. In line with decentralisation and autonomy in terms of urban and
environmental management, as stated above, the notion of conservation must have then
re-examine the standard approach, which always put the business or commercial
interests in first priority. It short, it is unmistakeable that urban conservation does not only
deal with the architectural requirements in terms of visual quality, but also must take into
account social and ecological aspects.
PERSPECTIVES ON URBAN HERITAGE CONSERVATION AND REVITALISATION
From the discussion above some significant issues as concluding remarks can be
made as follows:
1. The idea of conservation must be defined as human efforts concerning management of
organism or ecosystem, so that the utilisation of potential resource can sustain. The
quintessence of conservation is not against the new development or anti development.
Conservation should not only deal with maintenance and development of urban fabrics,
but, furthermore, it must accommodate inevitably new functions and vitality, which
based upon the needs of the all stakeholders on urban conservation development
through active participation of the community.

2. The common problems on conservation consists of (a) The notions of conservation is

apparently elitist, it means that the socialisation and the public awareness of heritage
structures are inadequate, (b) Topos (building and site) is economically conceived as a
commodity, and (c) the physical condition of the structures, due to the climate and
geographic situation.
3. Revitalisation deals not only with the architectural prerequisites (physical design), but
also how contributions can be made for social and ecological improvement. It means,
that in urban conservation architectural considerations, social and ecological aspects
must go hand in hand. Economical, social, ecological aspects must be put together and
then integrated into a sensitive revitalisation scheme.
4. By elaborating themes und problems on urban heritage conservation and revitalisation
the following aspects must be taken into account: (a) understanding the subject and the
process of urban conservation (b) objectives of urban conservation (c) socio-ecological
orientation (d) co-operation instead of confrontation in planning process.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ABEL, Chris: Localisation versus Globalisation, in: The Architectural Review (September
1994) S. 4-5.
BADSHAH, Akhtar A.: Our Urban Future. New Paradigms for Equity and Sustainability,
London 1996.
BISWAS, R.K: Schneller, hher, weiter! Grobaustellen der Superlative, in:
Stadtbauwelt, 132, 1996, S. 2746-2748.
BODENSCHATZ, H./GEISENHOF, J.: Pldoyer fr eine kulturelle Stadterneuerung, in: Die
alte Stadt, 3/91, S. 239-247.
BHME, Helmut et al.: Urbanisierung und Altstadterneuerung in Sdostasien, in: Trialog,
Bd. 56 (1998) S. 4-7.
CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT STUDY BANDUNG METROPOLITAN AREA, Bandung
1989.
DEVAS, Nick/RAKODI, Carole (Hrsg.): Managing Fast Growing Cities, New Approaches to
Urban Planning and Management in the Developing World, New York 1993.
DRHFER, Kerstin/TERLINDEN, Ursula: Verortungen. Geschlechterverhltnisse und
Raumstrukturen, Bassel 1998.
DUIVESTEIJN, Adri: De verbogene opgave, Thuis in de stad, Rotterdam 1994.
FORBES, D.K.: Asian Metropolis, Urbanisation and the Southeast Asian City, Melbourne
1996.
IPSEN, Detlev: ber den Zeitgeist der Stadterneuerung, in: Die alte Stadt, 1/92, S. 16-29.
_____________ (a): Die sozialrumlichen Bedingungen der offenen Stadt, Kassel 1998.
_____________ (b): Die Modernisierung der Gesellschaft und die Rolle des
Denkmalschutzes, Kassel 1998.
KORFF, Heinz-Rdiger: Globalisierung und Megastadt. Ein Phnomen aus soziologischer
Perspektive, in: Geographische Rundschau, 2 (Februar 1996) S. 120-123.
KRTKE, Stefan: Stadterneuerung in Asien, Afrika und Lateinamerika: Der Beitrag von
lokalen
Gewerbestrukturen
und
informellen
Wirtschaftsaktivitten
zur
Funktionsfhigkeit innerstdtischer Quartiere, in: Jahrbuch Stadterneuerung 1990/91,
Berlin 1991.

________________: Stadt, Raum, konomie. Einfhrung in aktuelle Problemfelder der

Stadtkonomie und Wirtschaftsgeographie, Basel 1996.
KULKE, R.: Jakartas schizophrene Seele, in: Der Architekt, 2 (Februar 1998) S. 96-100.
KUNTJORO-JAKTI, Dorodjatun (Hrsg.): Kemiskinan di Indonesia, Jakarta 1994.
KUNTO, Haryoto: Wajah Bandung Tempo Doeloe, Bandung 1984.
________________: Semerbak Bunga di Bandung Raya, Bandung 1986.
KUROKAWA, Kisho: The Philosophy of Symbiosis, London 1994.
KUSWARTOJO, Tjuk (ed.): Gelar Nalar Prof. Hasan Poerbo, 1999.
LANGDON, P. Asia bound, in: Progressive Architecture, Mrz 1995, S. 43-46.
MAGNIS-SUSENO, Franz: Neue Schwingen fr Garuda: Garuda zwischen Tradition und
Moderne, Mnchen 1989.
MARTOKUSUMO, Widjaja: Wacana Konservasi dan Nasib Bangunan Tua di Bandung,
Harian REPUBLIKA, 10 Juni 2000.
MUCHTAR, Hizrah/BIMASRONO, Aji/DARJOSANTOSO, Savitri: Proyek Penataan
Kembali Fasade Bangunan di Jalan Braga, Jurusan Teknik Arsitektur ITB, 1999..
RLAND, Jrgen (Hrsg.): The Dynamics of Metropolitan Management in Southeast Asia,
Singapore 1996.
SELLE, Klaus: Mit den Bewohnern die Stadt erneuern. Der Beitrag intermedirer
Organisationen zur Entwicklung stdtischer Quartiere, Darmstadt 1991.
SENG, Heng Jee: Vom Shophouse zur Megamall -der Verfall eines ffentlichen Raums,
in: StadtBauwelt, 48 (1996 ) S. 2722-2725.
SERAGELDIN, Ismal (Hrsg.): The Architecture of Empowerment, Singapore 1997.
SERVER, O.B.: Corruption: A Major Problem for Urban Management, Some Evidences
from Indonesia, in: Habitat International, 20/1 (1996) S. 23-41.
SILAS, J./PRIJOTOMO, J.: The Kampung in the City, Integrating the Kampung in the
Development of the City, in: Bandung 2000, Bandung 1994.
SOEDJATMOKO: The Social Challenge to Modern Islamic Architecture, in: Nanji, A.
(Hrsg.): Building for Tomorrow, S. 87-91, London 1994.
SUDARMO, Sri Probo: Recent Developments in the Indonesian Urban Development
Strategy, in: Burgess, R. u.a. (Hrsg.): The Challenge of Sustainable Cities, Neoliberasim and Urban Strategies in Developing Countries, London 1997, S. 230-244.