Analysis of Sociability Indicators on the Placemaking of the Gedung Filateli Jakarta

Main Article Content

Tsara Dhinna Mawardini


The use of a placemaking approach in the transformation of Gedung Filateli Jakarta into a creative space is one of the efforts to revitalize cultural heritage buildings. As a creative space, Gedung Filateli Jakarta must meet a number of indicators. This article aims to identify and analyze the application of socialization indicators in the placemaking of Gedung Filateli Jakarta. The method used is scheduled observations at Gedung Filateli Jakarta. The phenomena found during the observation will be analyzed using sociability indicators. Based on research that has been done on the placemaking of Gedung Filateli Jakarta, especially the great hall, terrace, and pedestrian areas, it has succeeded in accommodating various types of activities for visitors with varied backgrounds so as to produce various social interactions. The three areas of at Gedung Filateli Jakarta are actively used for various program activities including music performances, fashion shows, product exhibitions and regular visits. These findings have succeeded in validating the application of sociability indicators in Gedung Filateli Jakarta which describes the social position of Gedung Filateli Jakarta towards visitors as a creative public space. As a creative space, Gedung Filateli Jakarta is a placemaking object that can encourage social interaction


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Mawardini, T. D. (2023). Analysis of Sociability Indicators on the Placemaking of the Gedung Filateli Jakarta. Serat Rupa Journal of Design, 7(2).


Beattie, N. (1985). Place and Placemaking.Place and Placemaking Proceedings of the conference Urban Placemaking

Bohl, C. C. (2002). Place Making: Developing Town Centers, Main Streets, and Urban Villages Urban Land Institute.

Dameria, C., Akbar, R., Indradjati, P. N., & Tjokropandojo, D. S. (2020). A conceptual framework for understanding sense of place dimensions in the heritage context. Journal of Regional and City Planning, 31(2), 139-163.

Jorgensen, B. S., & Stedman, R. C. (2001). Sense of Place as an attitude: Lakeshore owners attitudes toward their properties. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21(3), 233-248.

Placemaking: what if we built our cities around places? (2016).

Plevoets, B., & Cleempoel, K. V. (2012). Reinventing architecture and interiors: the past, the present and the future adaptive reuse as a strategy towards conservation of cultural heritage: A survey of 19th and 20th century theories. RIE International conference 2012,

Sepe, M. (2017). Placemaking, livability and public spaces. Achieving sustainability through happy places. The Journal of Public Space, 2(4), 63-76.

Soedarsono, W., Astuti, E. Y., Paramitasari, A. U., Asriana, N., Putri, D., & Zahra, A. (2020). Placemaking in the Digital Era: A Case Study of M Bloc Space – Jakarta.Proceedings of the ARTEPOLIS 8 - the 8th Biannual International Conference Artepolis 2020,

Steele, F. (1981). The sense of place. CBI Pub. Co.

Toolis, E. E. (2017). Theorizing Critical Placemaking as a Tool for Reclaiming Public Space. American Journal of Community Psychology, 59(1-2), 184-199.

Wahyuni, S. (2018). placemaking sebagai strategi revitalisasi kawasan. Studi Kasus: Kawasan pecinan Kota Makassar. Jurnal Linears, 1(2), 103-112.

DEFINITION OF PLACEMAKING: Four Different Types (2014).

Yazdian, L. M. S., Diamant-Cohen, B., & Prendergast, T. (2022). Research Roundup: Placemaking: Expanding Our Reach and Empowering Communities. Children & Libraries, 20(3).