Sidi Boedi Darma
IV. RESEARCH ANALYSIS & FINDINGS
that stood face to face this alley space became a dark, humid and some looked liked garbage pool. Air movement is low or blocked.
That condition furthermore blocked the air movement or light of sun shine which could give negative impact to human health as well as building.
These narrow alleys brought difficulties in emergency situation, such as in fire, earthquake. The alley structure which seems like a labyrinth and its high sloop could be also functioned as trap for human being if emergency situation happened.
already broken and no one care, that waste water came direct into the river.
4.1.2. Ministerial Community Services Program
There was one what they called a “gift project” from one ministry with objective to provide the community with deep well construction for fresh water. It was offered to community without any previous information or planning. After construction there was no other communication for further development or maintenance program. This sample grants of project from a ministry is not only one happened in this sub district.
Such project some time difficult to integrate in this settlement because of limited open spaces in this area and land consolidation program is very difficult to conduct. At the other side Sub District continuous development proposals faced problems that the answer on that proposals didn’t meet they need and granted its continuity.
4.1.3. Third Parties Community Program
Some social or community services project came from third parties program. A student Social Service Program or Corporate Social Responsibility Program are also found. Those programs seemed like “one time” program. Sample to this project was the construction of “MCK”, which seems unplanned and take place where ever it is possible. The most of this “MCK” was built on flushing canals or close to the river.
Implementation such community project is difficult because of land availability. The community is happy to receive such instant project as long as there nothing is asked from them. Everything if it is related with their land will be very hard to realize. They are felt easy uncomfortable and leaning to reject that project.
4.2. Land Use
From the “Google map” and documentation could be imagined how that settlement growth. The land use planning seems neglected or improper implemented. Housing density left no more open spaces until riverbank except the narrow alleys without possibility for car accessibility. From main street Tamansari there is only one secondary street which can be used by car until 200m inside the settlement. The rest is structured like a labyrinth with many sloppy conditions to the river. This alley was not constructed
by design. It was happened through the land ownerships and formed through built houses.
All houses or buildings are constructed on private ownerships land except the buildings at Tamansari Street, which are majority belong to government. The strategic location with high land price made some implementation of communities’ empowerment programs very difficult.
Land reform or procurement is a sensitive matter to talk.
A cultural approach may be needed but need more time until a development program could be accepted. 36% of respondent refused to have land reform solution, 48% depended on proposals while the rest-16%
said no opinion about that. An apartment’s project as renewal program is agreed by 32% respondent, 58% gives no opinion and the rest need to see proposed solution. Most of Respondent need a massive socialization 4.3. Housing Condition
The surveyed houses could be described in the following chart:
Figure 13. Percentage of Housing Condition Source: private data visualization, 2015
From distribution chart above it is to understand that all land and houses are already belong to private ownerships and more than 50% have rented rooms while 36% conducts small shop to raise family income.
Regarding fresh water the chart showed that all community member have access to water with different resources. 11% of the houses used public
“MCK” and 89% have their own toilet and bathroom but only 7% of the surveyed houses have their own septic tank. The community leader said that the groundwater availability is very good in this area. In dry season
groundwater is still high although Cikapundung River’s water descended.
In that season the area is smelt from dried household waste at the canals.
According to respondents disease caused by this water wells was rare.
They are happy that fresh water and its availability is never been a serious problem in their community.
4.4. Waste and Waste Water Handling
The awareness of community in handling household waste is increased through government programs and rules. 100% respondent collected their garbage and bring ti to sub district temporary disposal, but all of them used PVC/plastic bag. 82% flew it waste water to river or canals without septic tank and 7% through septic tank and the rest 11% used public MCK which mostly flew its waste water into canals.
4.5. Community Environmental Awareness
Knowledge on sustainable concept is answered “Yes” by 9% respondents and the rest 91 person said “No”. 93% respondent agreed to have community septic tank regarding waste water treatment but didn’t have suggestion for solution while the rest said no idea upon that question.
Awareness on fire hazard is answered “Yes” by all respondents, but they have no idea about what is to do to have safer condition. Fire hydrant is not in the their planning. All community members are always alarmed by community leader about that hazard.
All of respondents understood that their wastewater polluted the river. They said there is no other choice to do. Less land availability and construction and maintenance cost are majority reasoned.