Tipologi alamat di perkotaan dan perdesaan Indonesia dalam proses standardisasi pengalamatan

Heri Sutanta; Ni Putu Praja Chintya; Dedi Atunggal; Diyono Diyono; M. Fakhruddin Mustofa; Suprajaka Siswosudarma

doi:10.22146/mgi.68348

Tipologi alamat di perkotaan dan perdesaan Indonesia dalam proses standardisasi pengalamatan

https://doi.org/10.22146/mgi.68348

Heri Sutanta^(1*), Ni Putu Praja Chintya⁽²⁾, Dedi Atunggal⁽³⁾, Diyono Diyono⁽⁴⁾, M. Fakhruddin Mustofa⁽⁵⁾, Suprajaka Siswosudarma⁽⁶⁾

(1) Fakultas Teknik, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
(2) Sekolah Vokasi, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
(3) Fakultas Teknik, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
(4) Fakultas Teknik, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
(5) Badan Informasi Geospasial, Cibinong, Bogor, Jawa Barat, Indonesia
(6) Badan Informasi Geospasial, Cibinong, Bogor, Jawa Barat, Indonesia
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract

Abstrak. Alamat merupakan salah satu komponen wajib pada identitas penduduk dan dokumen legal-formal lain yang digunakan dalam berbagai kepentingan serta kegiatan sehari-hari. Dalam dunia nyata terdapat variasi penulisan alamat. Variasi penulisan alamat ini memiliki elemen yang terkait aspek lokalitas wilayah maupun yang terkait dengan ketiadaan standar pengalamatan. Variasi penulisan alamat diinventarisasi melalui survei lapangan dan survei secara daring. Survei dilakukan di wilayah perdesaan dan perkotaan untuk dapat memotret berbagai tipe penulisan alamat. Tipologi penulisan alamat tersebut kemudian diklasifikasikan berdasar dua model. Berdasarkan fungsinya, ada alamat yang digunakan untuk kepentingan legal-formal dan alamat yang digunakan untuk penunjuk atau penanda lokasi. Berdasarkan karakteristik wilayahnya terdapat tipologi alamat perdesaan dan alamat perkotaan. Di model alamat perdesaan terdapat 18 komponen sedangkan di model alamat perkotaan terdapat 16 komponen. Selanjutnya, berdasarkan tipologi alamat yang diperoleh dan kebutuhan alamat dalam kegiatan legal-formal ditetapkan sifat kewajiban setiap komponen alamat. Tiga sifat yang ditetapkan meliputi wajib (W), bersyarat (B), dan opsional (O). Hasil penetapan ini selaras dengan RSNI2 tentang Pengalamatan di Wilayah Perdesaan dan Perkotaan di Indonesia.

Abstract. Address is one of the mandatory components of resident identity and other legal-formal documents used in various interests and daily activities. In the real world, there are variations of writing addresses. This variation of address writing has elements related to regional locality aspects and those associated with the absence of addressing standards. Address writing variations were inventoried through field surveys and online surveys. The survey was conducted in rural and urban areas to portray various types of address writing. The typology of address writing is then classified based on two models. Based on its function, there are addresses used for legal-formal purposes and addresses used for pointers or location markers. Based on the characteristics of the region, there are typologies of rural addresses and urban addresses. In the rural address model, there are 18 components, while in the urban address model, there are 16 components. Furthermore, based on the typology of addresses obtained and the need for addresses in legal-formal activities, the nature of the obligations of each component of the address is determined. The three defined properties include mandatory (W), conditional (K), and optional (O). The results of this determination are in line with the RSNI2 concerning Addressing in Rural and Urban Areas in Indonesia.

Keywords

alamat; tipologi; perkotaan; perdesaan; standardisasi

Full Text:

PDF

References

Azwar, W., Hasanuddin, H., Muliono, M., Permatasari, Y., Amri, M. U., & Yurisman, Y. (2020). The Models of Nagari Indigenous Governments in West Sumatra. Jurnal Bina Praja, 12(1), 33–42. https://doi.org/10.21787/jbp.12.2020.33-42

Chow, T. E., Dede-Bamfo, N., & Dahal, K. R. (2016). Geographic Disparity of Positional Errors and Matching Rate of Residential Addresses among Geocoding Solutions. Annals of GIS, 22(1), 29–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/19475683.2015.1085437

Coetzee, S., & Bishop, J. (2009). Address Databases for National SDI: Comparing The Novel Data Grid Approach to Data Harvesting and Federated Databases. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 23(9), 1179–1209. https://doi.org/10.1080/13658810802084806

Dumedah, G. (2021). Address Points of Landmarks and Paratransit Services as A Credible Reference Database for Geocoding. Transactions in GIS, 25(2), 1027–1048. https://doi.org/10.1111/tgis.12716

Eden District Council. (n.d.-a). Application for Address Allocation for New Street Name Property Number or Name for New Build or Conversion of Existing Building into Dwellings ( Barn ) for Commercial and Residential Properties. 1–4.

Eden District Council. (n.d.-b). Property Merge Street Naming and Numbering Application for Address Allocation Merge of two or more properties into a single property Property Use Once Merge is Complete Type of Residential Property Following Merge Property Merge.

Federal Geographic Data Committee. (2011). FGDC-STD-016-2011 United States Thoroughfare , Landmark , and Postal Address Data Standard.

Goochland County Property Numbering and Street Naming Manual, (2017).United States. (bingung)

Gluck, M. (1991). Making Sense of Human Wayfinding: Review of Cognitive and Linguistic Knowledge for Personal Navigation with a New Research Direction. In Cognitive and Linguistic Aspects of Geographic Space (pp. 117–135). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-2606-9_9

Goldberg, D. W., Swift, J. N., & Wilson, J. P. (2008). Geocoding Best Practices: Reference Data, Input Data and Feature Matching. University of Southern California GIS Research Laboratory Technical Report No 8.

Heatcote, E. (2015). Why house numbers were invented – and became a tool we count on. Financial Times, October 20(October), 7–12.

Hockaday, J. (2008). AS/NZS 4819:2013 : Geographic Information- Rural and Urban Addressing and AS/

NZS 4590:2006 Intercchange of Client Information, New Zealand

ISO. (2015). ISO 19160-1:2015 Addressing — Part 1: Conceptual model.

ISO. (2017). ISO 19160-4 Addressig — International postal address components and template language. (bingung)

Jha, D. (2011). House Numbers Changed Yet Again. Hindustan Times. https://www.hindustantimes.com/india/house-numbers-changed-yet-again/story-SUpZyHg8K0tIMTj2iIc79N.htm

Land Information New Zealand. (2018). Useful information for people working with Addresses (Issue June). Land Information New Zealand, New Zealand

Lind, M. (2008). Addresses as An Infrastructure Component: Danish Experiences and Perspectives. ISO Workshop on Address Standards : Considering The Issues Related to An International Address Standard, 94–105.

Minton, C. (2014). Peculiar British House Numbering System. Chandler’s for Today. https://chandlersfordtoday.co.uk/peculiar-british-house-numbering-system/#:~:text=Something that visitors to Britain,wasn’t 127 at all.

Ratcliffe, J. H. (2004). Geocoding Crime and A First Estimate of A Minimum Acceptable Hit Rate. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 18(1), 61–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/13658810310001596076

Republik Indonesia. (2021). Peraturan Pemerintah RI Nomor 2 Tahun 2021 Tentang Penyelenggaraan Nama Rupa Bumi, Jakarta

Rose-Redwood, R., & Tantner, A. (2012). Introduction: Governmentality, House Numbering and The Spatial History of The Modern City. Urban History, 39(4), 607–613. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963926812000405

Setiawan, B. (1998). Local Dynamics in Informal Settlement Development : A Case Study of Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Doctoral dissertation. The University of British Columbia.

South African Bureau of Standards (SABS). (2009a). SANS 1883-1, Geographic information – Address, Part 1: Data format of addresses.

South African Bureau of Standards (SABS). (2009b). SANS 1883-3, Geographic information – Address, Part 3: Guidelines for address allocation and updates.

Sutanta, H., Chintya, N. P. P., Suprajaka, S., Widada, A., Diyono, D., Mustofa, F., Atunggal, D., Widowati, D. A., Nugraheni, M. E., & Kusumawardhani, R. (2021). Standardisasi Alamat di Indonesia: Kondisi, Urgensi, dan Tantangannya. Seminar Nasional Geomatika, 833–840.

Sutanta, H., Chintya, N. P. P., dan Syarafina, Z. (2016). Issues and challenges in developing geocoded address in Indonesia. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1755(November). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4958505

Universal Postal Union. (2013). Postal Addressing Systems in Member Countries and/or Territories: Indonesia. UPU: Universal Postal Union. https://www.upu.int/UPU/media/upu/PostalEntitiesFiles/addressingUnit/idnEn.pdf

Vuolteenaho, J. (2012). Numbering the streetscape: Mapping the spatial history of numerical street names in Europe. Urban History, 39(4), 659–679. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963926812000442

DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/mgi.68348