Mobility patterns consideration of educational facilities distribution model formulation in Southeast Malang Regional development plan

Respati Wikantiyoso; Tonny Suhartono; Pindo Tutuko; Aditya Galih Sulaksono

doi:10.30822/arteks.v7i3.1870

Authors

Respati Wikantiyoso Department of Architecture, Universitas Merdeka Malang , Department of Architecture, Universitas Merdeka Malang https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4301-7868 (unauthenticated)
Tonny Suhartono Department of Architecture, Universitas Merdeka Malang , Department of Architecture, Universitas Merdeka Malang
Pindo Tutuko Department of Architecture, Universitas Merdeka Malan , Department of Architecture, Universitas Merdeka Malan
Aditya Galih Sulaksono Department of Information System, Universitas Merdeka Malang , Department of Information System, Universitas Merdeka Malang https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3748-4902 (unauthenticated)

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30822/arteks.v7i3.1870

Keywords:

Educational facilities distribution, Mobility patterns, Space syntax, Spatial connectivity

Abstract

Regional disparities, and urban sprawl, will cause inequality in mobility between regions—one of the causes of the uneven distribution of educational facilities. The study of mobility patterns provides an overview of student movement patterns from and to school. The analysis is needed to determine the potential problems due to spatial disparities in the settlement Development Area. The research purpose; is (1) to obtain a model for determining the location and distribution of public schools based on mobility patterns in urban settlement development areas and (2) to obtain the model formulation for spatial planning distribution of educational facilities. This research uses a descriptive exploratory method with Space Syntax analysis. The research location was selected using the Classified Purposive Sampling method with an observation scale in the Development Area. The school zoning system has implications for equal distribution of education, reducing the mobility gap between regions, reducing congestion, air pollution, and dependence on motorized transportation. The study results of patterns of connectivity, accessibility, and mobility become a consideration for the placement of educational facilities in the Development Area. This study will improve the arrangement of spatial patterns and distribution of educational facilities based on studies of connectivity, regional accessibility, and student mobility.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Respati Wikantiyoso, Department of Architecture, Universitas Merdeka Malang, Department of Architecture, Universitas Merdeka Malang

Professor of Architecture

References

Alitajer, Saeid, and Ghazaleh Molavi Nojoumi. 2016. ‘Privacy at Home: Analysis of Behavioral Patterns in the Spatial Configuration of Traditional and Modern Houses in the City of Hamedan Based on the Notion of Space Syntax’. Frontiers of Architectural Research 5 (3): 341–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2016.02.003.

Assche, Kristof van, and Nodir Djanibekov. 2012. ‘Spatial Planning as Policy Integration: The Need for an Evolutionary Perspective. Lessons from Uzbekistan’. Land Use Policy 29 (1): 179–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.06.004.

Assche, Kristof van, Ming Chien Lo, and Raoul Beunen. 2013. ‘A Perspective on Planning, Smart Growth and Place Branding’. In International Place Branding Yearbook 2012, 69–77. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137282552_5.

Bhat, Chandra, Susan Handy, Kara Kockelman, Hani Mahmassani, Anand Gopal, Issam Srour, and Lisa Weston. 2002. ‘Development of an Urban Accessibility Index: Formulations, Aggregation, and Application’. Austin.

Brown, Frank E. 1997. ‘Space Is the Machine’. Design Studies 18 (3): 316–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(97)89854-7.

Chica-Olmo, Jorge, Carlos Rodríguez-López, and Palma Chillón. 2018. ‘Effect of Distance from Home to School and Spatial Dependence between Homes on Mode of Commuting to School’. Journal of Transport Geography 72 (October): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2018.07.013.

Geurs, Karst T. 2018. ‘Planning With Accessibility Indices in the Netherlands: Discussion Paper’. In International Transport Forum, 28. Netherlands: OECD/ITF. https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/transport-planning-accessibility-indices-netherlands.pdf.

Giannopoulou, Maria, Yiannis Roukounis, and Vasilis Stefanis. 2012. ‘Traffic Network and the Urban Environment: An Adapted Space Syntax Approach’. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 48: 1887–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.1163.

Iacono, Michael, Kevin J. Krizek, and Ahmed El-Geneidy. 2010. ‘Measuring Non-Motorized Accessibility: Issues, Alternatives, and Execution’. Journal of Transport Geography 18 (1): 133–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2009.02.002.

Koohsari, Mohammad Javad, Andrew T. Kaczynski, Billie Giles-Corti, and Justyna Anna Karakiewicz. 2013. ‘Effects of Access to Public Open Spaces on Walking: Is Proximity Enough?’ Landscape and Urban Planning 117 (September): 92–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.04.020.

Krizek, Kevin J. 2010. ‘Measuring Accessibility: Prescriptions for Performance Measures of the Creative and Sustainable City’. International Journal of Sustainable Development 13 (1/2): 149. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSD.2010.035105.

Lamíquiz, Patxi J., and Jorge López-Domínguez. 2015. ‘Effects of Built Environment on Walking at the Neighbourhood Scale. A New Role for Street Networks by Modelling Their Configurational Accessibility?’ Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 74 (April): 148–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2015.02.003.

Lättman, Katrin, Lars E. Olsson, and Margareta Friman. 2018. ‘A New Approach to Accessibility – Examining Perceived Accessibility in Contrast to Objectively Measured Accessibility in Daily Travel’. Research in Transportation Economics 69 (September): 501–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2018.06.002.

Maes, Joachim, Camino Liquete, Anne Teller, Markus Erhard, Maria Luisa Paracchini, José I. Barredo, Bruna Grizzetti, et al. 2016. ‘An Indicator Framework for Assessing Ecosystem Services in Support of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020’. Ecosystem Services 17 (February): 14–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.10.023.

Mandic, Sandra, Susan Sandretto, Enrique García Bengoechea, Debbie Hopkins, Antoni Moore, Judith Rodda, and Gordon Wilson. 2017. ‘Enrolling in the Closest School or Not? Implications of School Choice Decisions for Active Transport to School’. Journal of Transport & Health 6 (September): 347–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2017.05.006.

Nes, Akkelies van, and Claudia Yamu. 2021. Introduction to Space Syntax in Urban Studies. 1st ed. United States: Springer.

Reyes, Mario, Antonio Páez, and Catherine Morency. 2014. ‘Walking Accessibility to Urban Parks by Children: A Case Study of Montreal’. Landscape and Urban Planning 125 (May): 38–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.02.002.

Safarah, Azizah Arifinna, and Udik Budi Wibowo. 2018. ‘Program Zonasi Di Sekolah Dasar Sebagai Upaya Pemerataan Kualitas Pendidikan Di Indonesia’. Lentera Pendidikan : Jurnal Ilmu Tarbiyah Dan Keguruan 21 (2): 206. https://doi.org/10.24252/lp.2018v21n2i6.

Sevtsuk, Andres, and Raul Kalvo. 2022. ‘Predicting Pedestrian Flow along City Streets: A Comparison of Route Choice Estimation Approaches in Downtown San Francisco’. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation 16 (3): 222–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2020.1858377.

Vragović, I., and E. Louis. 2006. ‘Network Community Structure and Loop Coefficient Method’. Physical Review E 74 (1): 016105. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.74.016105.

Wikantiyoso, Respati. 2005. Paradigma Perencanaan Dan Perancangan Kota. 2nd ed. Malang: Grup Konservasi Arsitektur dan Kota, Jurusan Arsitektur UNMER Malang.

Wikantiyoso, Respati, P. Tutuko, T. Suhartono, A. G. Sulaksono, and T. P. Wikananda. 2021. ‘Mobility Pattern Model of Educational Facilities Distribution Based on Space Syntax Analysis in Malang City Development Area’. Jakarta.