Exploratory Arrangement of City Park Facilities Through Visitor Behavior Mapping (Case Study: Adipura Park in Muara Enim City)

Authors

  • Mita Hargianti Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Science and Technology, Universitas Serasan, Indonesia
  • Rika Septiana Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Science and Technology, Universitas Serasan, Indonesia
  • Yandra Iskandar Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Science and Technology, Universitas Serasan, Indonesia
  • Nasution Iskandar Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Science and Technology, Universitas Serasan, Indonesia
  • Win Insani Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Science and Technology, Universitas Serasan, Indonesia
  • Husnul Hidayat Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Sriwijaya, Indonesia.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32315/jlbi.v15i2.656

Keywords:

Behavior, Behavior Mapping, City Park Facilities , Public Spaces, Visitor Management

Abstract

Rapid urban development has increased the public’s need for urban parks as public spaces. However, the lack of a systematic evaluation mechanism based on user behavior has often resulted in facility layouts being out of sync with spatial characteristics and visitors’ activity patterns. This causes park utilization rates to inadequately reflect spatial potential, requiring an empirical approach to understand the relationship between spatial characteristics and user behavior. This study analyzes the distribution of visitor activities and their relationship with spatial characteristics to formulate facility layout recommendations using behavior mapping at Adipura Park in Muara Enim, South Sumatra. A descriptive qualitative approach supported by quantitative data was applied through direct observation over seven days in three time periods. The park was divided into zones based on function and spatial characteristics. Results indicate variations in activity intensity and type across zones. Zones 2 and 3 show the highest utilization levels, while Zone 1 is moderate and mainly circulatory. Zones 4 and 5 tend to be passive due to limited facilities, comfort, and visibility. These findings underscore the importance of aligning facility layouts with user behavior as a basis for urban park planning. The findings provide empirical guidance for designing more responsive, efficient, and user-oriented public park spaces.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] B. He, S. Wang, Q. Xiong, Z. Zhao, and Y. Hou, “Urban Park Planning for Sustainability: Resident Insights from China’s Major Cities,” Land, vol. 14, no. 1, p. 128, Jan. 2025, doi: 10.3390/land14010128.

[2] N. P. D. Agustin Permanasuri, “Identifikasi Taman Pasuk Kameloh Sebagai Ruang Publik di Kota Palangka Raya,” J. Pendidik. Tambusai, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 4748–4754, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.31004/jptam.v7i1.5986.

[3] M. Carmona, Public places urban spaces: The dimensions of urban design. Architectural Press, 2021. doi: 10.4324/9781315158457.

[4] I. K. I. W. Pranata and A. A. G. R. Remawa, “Pengaruh seting ruang dan aktifitas manusia terhadap perilaku pengunjung di ruang publik,” Vitr. J. Arsitektur, Bangunan dan Lingkung., vol. 11, no. 3, p. 245, Jun. 2022, doi: 10.22441/vitruvian.2022.v11i3.006.

[5] P. M. Wibowo, G. Hardiman, and A. Suprapti, “Pengaruh Ruang Terbuka Publik di Perumnas Tlogosari Semarang,” E-journal Undip, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 18–27, 2020, doi: 0.14710/mdl.1.1.2020.18-27.

[6] M. Hargianti, “Analisis Kebutuhan Fasilitas Instruktur Ruang Terbuka Publik Di Tepian Sungai Musi,” J. PenSil, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 130–140, 2021, doi: 10.21009/jpensil.v10i3.23003.

[7] D. Farahdina, M. N. Loebis, and W. Zahra, “Pengaruh Sosial Media Terhadap Aktivitas di Ruang Publik (Studi Kasus Lapangan Merdeka Medan),” J. Lingkung. Binaan Indones., vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 40–45, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.32315/jlbi.v9i1.98.

[8] D. T. W. S. Putro and Siswanto, “Kajian Perilaku Pengguna Ruang Publik Di Kota Malang,” Pangripta, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 192–204, Sep. 2018, doi: 10.58411/v9qzax24.

[9] B. Maharani, R. C. T. H. Permana, and R. P. Utomo, “Faktor-faktor yang Mendorong Penggunaan Ruang Publik bagi Warga di Permukiman Padat (Studi Kasus Lingkungan Rusunawa Begalon I & II, Kota Surakarta),” Desa-Kota, vol. 6, no. 1, p. 14, Mar. 2024, doi: 10.20961/desa-kota.v6i1.75698.14-25.

[10] J. Gehl, Life between buildings : using public space. Washington, DC: Island Press, 2011. [Online]. Available: http://lj.uwpress.org/lookup/doi/10.3368/lj.8.1.54

[11] A. Bashiroh and A. Bachriwindi, “Ruang Publik yang Inklusif: Keamanan Psikologis dan Keselamatan Gender di Kawasan Pusat Kota,” Jural Ris. Rumpun Ilmu Tek., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 46–60, 2024, doi: 10.55606/jurritek.v3i2.6716.

[12] J. Chen, Q. Liu, X. Liu, Y. Wang, H. Nie, and X. Xie, “Exploring the Functioning of Online Self-Organizations during Public Health Emergencies: Patterns and Mechanism,” Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, vol. 20, no. 5, p. 4012, Feb. 2023, doi: 10.3390/ijerph20054012.

[13] william H. Whyte, The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. Newyork: Project for Public Spaces, 1980.

[14] R. Petrtýlová, “Behavioural mapping and online data as tools for socio-spatial analysis of public spaces – Bratislava , Slovakia waterfront case study,” pp. 39–54, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.2478/geosc-2022-0004.

[15] X. Wang, “Differences in Users’ Activity Characteristics and Spatial Patterns in Neighborhood Parks during the Late Afternoon and Evening Periods,” no. July, 2023, doi: 10.3390/land12071438.

[16] H. Pamungkas and Y. Arsandrie, “Behavioral Mapping Dan Adaptasi Terhadap Lingkungan Pada Squatter Settlement,” NALARs, vol. 19, no. 2, p. 115, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.24853/nalars.19.2.115-130.

[17] J. W. Creswell, Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, 4th ed. SAGE, 2014. [Online]. Available: https://books.google.co.id/books?id=4uB76IC_pOQC&printsec=copyright&hl=id#v=onepage&q&f=false

[18] Y. S. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, “Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In Handbook of Qualitative Research,” Denzin and Lincoln, Eds., Sage, 1994. [Online]. Available: https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/handbook-of-qualitative-research/book204848

[19] K. Bishop et al., “Behavior Mapping and Its Application in Smart Social Spaces,” Encyclopedia, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 171–185, Jan. 2024, doi: 10.3390/encyclopedia4010015.

[20] D. T. Do, Y. Cheng, A. Shojai, and Y. Chen, “Public park behaviour in Da Nang: An investigation into how open space is used,” Front. Archit. Res., vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 454–470, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.foar.2019.05.006.

[21] D. G. Vidal et al., “Patterns of human behaviour in public urban green spaces: On the influence of users’ profiles, surrounding environment, and space design,” Urban For. Urban Green., vol. 74, p. 127668, Aug. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2022.127668.

[22] S. R. Müller et al., “Analyzing GPS Data for Psychological Research: A Tutorial,” Adv. Methods Pract. Psychol. Sci., vol. 5, no. 2, Apr. 2022, doi: 10.1177/25152459221082680.

[23] M. Mohammadi and A. Koutamanis, “Affordance-based design evaluation: Bridging architectural intention and adaptive user behavior,” Des. Stud., vol. 101, p. 101361, Dec. 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.destud.2025.101361.

Downloads

Published

2026-06-30

Issue

Vol. 15 No. 2 (2026): JLBI

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Mita Hargianti

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.