Balancing Heritage in Urban Expansion: Gedung Sate’s Resilience towards a JunkSpace Landscape

Sebastian Emillio Hanindasaputra; Rony Gunawan Sunaryo; Bramasta Putra Redyantanu

doi:10.9744/acesa.v8i1.14662

Authors

Sebastian Emillio Hanindasaputra Master student, Architecture Program, Petra Christian University, Surabaya, Indonesia
Rony Gunawan Sunaryo Department of Architecture, Universitas Atma Jaya, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Bramasta Putra Redyantanu Architecture Program, Petra Christian University, Surabaya, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.9744/acesa.v8i1.14662

Keywords:

Junkspace, Urban informality , Heritage resilience, Spatial heterogeneity

Abstract

This paper argues that the vertical stratification of formal, informal, and historical layers in Bandung contributes to the emergence of Junkspace, particularly around Gedung Sate, a heritage government building embedded in a rapidly urbanizing context. Drawing on Koolhaas’ concept of Junkspace and theories of spatial heterogeneity, the research explores how informal peripheries intersect with formal urban growth, creating porous hybrid spaces that defy conventional spatial order. Through qualitative spatial analysis, street-level observations, and time-lapse figure-ground studies from 2017 to 2025, the study reveals that informal structures adapt to, rather than displace, formal ones. This coexistence generates architectural incoherence marked by non-hierarchical, fused uses. The findings suggest that Gedung Sate is evolving into a form of Junkspace not merely through the erosion of spatial order but through active transformations that blend historical permanence with dynamic informal encroachments, reflecting the complex and layered realities of contemporary Bandung.

References

Ardianta, D. A., & Yatmo, Y. A. (2021). Invisible playground: Konstruksi hubungan ruang-pergerakan-kejadian. MODUL, 21(1), 29–36. https://doi.org/10.14710/mdl.21.1.2021.29-36.

World Population Review. (n.d.). Bandung population 2026. from https://worldpopulationreview.com/cities/indonesia/bandung

Kamalipour, H. (2025). Framing urbanities: Invisible/visible urban assemblages. Visual Studies, 40(3), 608–614. https://doi.org/10.1080/1472586X.2024.2301735.

Kamalipour, H., & Peimani, N. (2019). Negotiating space and visibility: Forms of informality in public space. Sustainability, 11(17), 4807. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11174807.

de Certeau, M. (2013). The practice of everyday life. University of California Press.

Le Corbusier. (n.d.). The radiant city: Elements of a doctrine of urbanism to be used as the basis of our machine-age civilization. Orion Press.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Sage.

Gibson, J. J. (1986). The ecological approach to visual perception. Erlbaum.

Gouverneur, D. (2015). Planning and design for future informal settlements: Shaping the self-constructed city. Routledge.

Jacobs, J. (1992). The death and life of great American cities. Vintage.

Koolhaas, R. (2006). The generic city (J. S. Avia, Trans.). Editorial Gustavo Gili: Barcelona, Spain.

Koolhaas, R., & Foster, H. (2016). Junkspace with running room. Notting Hill Editions.

Kusbandiah, D., & Wisnuadji, S. (2024). Signifikansi arsitektur dinding interior pada bangunan heritage Gedung Sate Jawa Barat. Dinasti Information and Technology, 1(3), 96–108. https://doi.org/10.38035/dit.v1i3.1128

Lefaivre, L., & Tzonis, A. (2003). Critical regionalism: Architecture and identity in a globalized world. Prestel.

Lucas, R. (2016). Research methods for architecture. Laurence King Publishing.

Lynch, K. (2006). City sense and city design: Writings and projects of Kevin Lynch (T. Banerjee & M. Southworth, Eds.). MIT Press.

Romice, O., Porta, S., & Feliciotti, A. (2020). Masterplanning for change: Designing the resilient city. RIBA Publishing.

Rossi, A. (1982). The architecture of the city (P. Eisenman, Intro.). MIT Press

Rowe, C., & Koetter, F. (1993). Collage city. MIT Press.

Spencer, A., & Zwicky, A. M. (Eds.). (2008). The handbook of morphology. Wiley-Blackwell.

Wang, D., & Groat, L. N. (2013). Architectural research methods (2nd ed.). Wiley.

Wigglesworth, S., & Till, J. (Eds.). (1998). The everyday and architecture. Academy Press.

Wiryomartono, B. (2020). Traditions and transformations of habitation in Indonesia: Power, architecture, and urbanism. Springer.

Yalçın, Z. Ö. (2022). From space to junkspace: Four episodes of/in architectural theory [Master’s thesis, İzmir Institute of Technology]. Academia.edu. https://www.academia.edu/102584607/FROM_SPACE_TO_JUNKSPACE_FOUR_EPISODES_OF_IN_ARCHITECTURAL_THEORY_MEKANDAN_ATIKMEKANA_M%C4%B0MARLIK_TEOR%C4%B0S%C4%B0NDE_TEOR%C4%B0S%C4%B0N%C4%B0N_D%C3%96RT_B%C3%96L%C3%9CM_%C3%9C

Young, F., & Cleveland, B. (2022). Affordances, architecture and the action possibilities of learning environments: A critical review of the literature and future directions. Buildings, 12(1), 76. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12010076

Yatmo, Y. A., Atmodiwirjo, P., & Paramita, K. D. (2013). Whose waste is it anyway? Journal of Urban Design, 18(4), 534–552. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2013.824364