










































 | 147  
 

         Geoplanning 
Vol 3, No. 2, 2016, 147-160                                                                                                                                                        Journal of Geomatics and Planning 

                                                                                                 E-ISSN: 2355-6544 
http://ejournal.undip.ac.id/index.php/geoplanning 

doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160 

MITIGATION SCENARIOS FOR RESIDENTIAL FIRES IN DENSELY POPULATED URBAN 
SETTLEMENTS IN SUKAHAJI VILLAGE, BANDUNG CITY  

S. A. H. Sagala a, P. Adhitama b, D. G. Sianturi c, U. Al-Faruq b 

a Bandung Institute of Technology, Indonesia 
b Resilience Development Initiative, Bandung, Indonesia  
c Perumnas, Indonesia 

Abstract: Residential fires are a form of disaster that often occurs in urban areas 
especially in densely populated settlements. This study looks at possible mitigation 
scenarios for this kind of disaster. A case study was conducted in Babakan Ciparay Sub-
District in Bandung City, among the densely populated settlements, and was focused 
especially on Sukahaji Village, a sub-unit of Babakan Ciparay, which is the most densely 
populated village in Bandung City with up to 234.14 people/ha. There have been six 
structural fires recorded from 2007 until 2010 occurring in Sukahaji. This study applied 
stratified random sampling as the preferred sampling technique and data collection 
method from a total population of 3,227 buildings. The data was then examined using 
risk analysis. The results have led to two intervention measures suggested as mitigation 
scenarios for residential fires that can be applied within the Sukahaji Village. The study 
concludes that mitigation measures through strengthening community capacity can be 
the principal option in reducing risk to fires in densely populated urban settlements. 
 
  

Copyright © 2016 GJGP-UNDIP  
This open access article is distributed under a  

Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC-SA) 4.0 International license. 
 
 
 

How to cite (APA 6th Style): 
Sagala, S. A. H., et al. (2016). Mitigation scenarios for residential fires in densely populated urban settlements in Sukahaji Village, Bandung 
City. Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, 3(2), 147-160. doi:10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160 

 

1. INTRODUCTION 

Fires in urban areas often break out in densely populated residential areas. The source of the fire hazard 
is often caused by careless residents during daily activities such as smoking, cooking, use of electronic 
equipment, playing with live fire, and gas leaks. Besides, fires can as well be caused by natural incidents 
such as lightning, earthquakes (rupturing gas pipes), volcanic eruptions, and drought (Indonesian 
Government, 2007). Sagala et al. (2014) observed that community's behavior related to residential fires is 
unsafe. It involves fire related activities, which are often conducted along with other activities. 

According to the IFRC (2010), densely populated residential areas are vulnerable to disasters, especially 
fires. Bandung is a city with high population density with up to 16,008.53 people/km2 or roughly 160.0853 
people/ha (Bandung Central Bureau of Statistics, 2009). In the recent study by Tarigan et al. (2016), 
Bandung has grown as one of the important metropolitan areas in Indonesia.  

Huang (2009) argued that some of the most loss-inflicting fires are the ones that occurred in 
urban/residential areas. In addition to that, Xin and Huang (2013) studied the model reporting the relation 
between losses of lives, per m2 annually. The inappropriate set up of billboards on exterior walls on the 
building could potentially trigger fires and accelerate fire spreading (Zhou, 2013). Therefore, the general 
relationship between urban planning and the incident of urban fire exist. As stated by the Fire Prevention 
and Mitigation Agency of Bandung, urban fires occur most often in areas with a high population density. 

In general, the data from Local Disaster Management Agency (BPBD) show that during ten years (2000-
2010), 1,624 fires broke out with around 773 incidents (48%) taking place in residential areas. The average 

Article Info: 
Received: 26 February 2016 
in revised form: 10 September 2016 
Accepted: 01 October 2016 
Available Online: 31 October 2016 
 

Keywords:  
Fires, densely populated areas, 
urban risk, mitigation scenario 
 

Corresponding Author: 
Saut Aritua Hasiholan Sagala 
Bandung Institute of Technology, 
Indonesia 
Email: saut.sagala@gmail.com  

OPEN ACCESS 

http://dx.doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160
http://dx.doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160
mailto:saut.sagala@gmail.com


 
Sagala et al. / Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 3, No. 2, 2016, 147-160 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160 

148 | 
 

number of fire incidents in Bandung sums up to 162 incidents per year with the material loss going up to 
IDR 21,137,813,636 each year (BPBD Bandung, 2016). Table 1 shows the high rate of urban fires and the 
huge loss-inflicting on Bandung. 

 

Table 1. Total loss and fire incidents in Bandung City (BPBD Bandung, 2016) 

Year Total No. of Incidents Fatalities Non-fatal Casualties Approximate Loss (Rupiah-IDR) 

2000 180 6 5 18,874,700,000 

2001 167 2 10 74,557,150,000 

2002 207 4 22 20,464,050,000 

2003 157 4 9 10,883,600,000 

2004 173 4 3 13,880,300,000 

2005 134 10 12 17,771,000,000 

2006 123 3 3 11,041,750,000 

2007 160 3 10 36,521,500,000 

2008 141 1 8 12,235,700,000 

2009 121 4 9 9,801,200,000 

2010 61 0 2 6,485,000,000 

2011 124 Na Na Na 

2012 136 Na Na Na 

2013 131 Na Na Na 

2014 162 Na Na Na 

2015 177 Na Na Na 

Total 2,354 41 93 232,515,950,000 

 

Table 1 provides data on the total number of incidents and also the approximate loss Bandung sustained 
due to residential fires during 2000-2010. The economic loss hit the highest number in 2001 with damages 
amounting up to IDR 74,557,150,000. Out of all these occurrences, the majority of them took place in 
residential buildings. This information is presented in Figure 1. 

 

Figure 1. Fire incidents in Bandung City years 2000-2010 (BPBD Bandung, 2016) 

http://dx.doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160


 
Sagala et al. / Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 3, No. 2, 2016, 147-160 

doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160 

                                                              

 | 149  
 

Babakan Ciparay (Figure 2) stands out as one of Bandung’s sub-districts with the highest number of fire 
incidents from 2007-2010, with 34 occurrences within that timeframe. It is exacerbated by the fact that 
Babakan Ciparay Sub-District has the highest population than any other districts in Bandung with 144,892 
residents (Bandung Central Bureau of Statistics, 2009). Spreading up to 745 ha, Babakan Ciparay is the 
densest populated district; approximately 19,448.59 people within each square kilometer, making it a 
vulnerable target to fires. In total, six villages make up Babakan Ciparay Sub-District, where Sukahaji Village 
proves to be the densest populated measuring up 234.14 people/ha.  

From recorded incidents, it is known that six of them occurred within the houses of Sukahaji in 2007-
2010. Based on this fact, Sukahaji is used as a case study in this work. The study will focus on Sukahaji’s 
Neighborhood Unit (RW) 01- 04 to be more detailed and rigorous. This study aims to develop proper 
mitigation scenarios feasible to be applied in Sukahaji Village. Fire mitigation scenarios are required by the 
Indonesian Law no. 24/2007 – a law on disaster mitigation – as a form of disaster risk reduction measure. 
Furthermore, the integration between development programs and risk reduction is also mandated by the 
Law. 

 

Figure 2. Map of the study area (Authors, 2016) 

 

 

Some of studies on residential fires in densely populated settlements have been previously conducted. 
Prathama (2011) and Dwijayanti (2008) carried out research of urban fires within Bandung City but omitted 
Geographical Information Systems (GIS) as a tool of analysis. The use of GIS in disaster studies is expected 
to boost the accuracy in which the study is conducted and also the mitigation measures produced by the 
study. Wahyudi (2004), on the other hand, utilized GIS but the area of study was too large and resulted in 
homogenous risk analysis for each type of land use. Thus, it was not able to create any mitigation measures 
for a smaller area of study. This study aims to fill in the gap where GIS is used to analyze fire risk in detail 
and a smaller area of study. This article will conduct a more detailed discussion using individual buildings 
from neighborhood sub-units (RT) as a basis variable for analysis (focused on Neighborhood Unit 01-04 of 
Sukahaji Village). The result will be a more detailed analysis of the area of study thus producing more 

Area of Study 

Bandung City 

Babakan Ciparay Sub-district 

http://dx.doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160


 
Sagala et al. / Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 3, No. 2, 2016, 147-160 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160 

150 | 
 

specific mitigation measures. This study on densely populated settlements may be replicated, or at least 
referred to, by other residential areas. In more concrete applications, the results of this study could be 
implemented in the designing of Detailed Spatial Plans (RDTR) and Building and Environmental Plans (RTBL) 
as additional material. Eventually, future spatial plans will take into account the disaster aspect of the built 
environment, especially residential fires and other fire disasters. 

At the outset, this article will examine urban and residential fires in Bandung City, particularly within 
Sukahaji Village, and the facts surrounding the incidents. The next part will present a literature review 
based on other studies that have been conducted before discussing fires and fire mitigation in urban areas. 
The third part will explain the methodology used in this study, followed by the fourth part providing 
possible mitigation scenarios to be carried out based on previous risk analyses of Sukahaji Village. The fifth 
and final part will present the conclusion and also recommendations which will expectantly serve as input 
for decision makers in fire risk reduction efforts in Sukahaji Village. 

2. DATA AND METHODS 

This section consists of two parts. The first explains the components of a fire hazard that will be used in 
the analysis. The second part discusses data surrounding vulnerability. In general, this study calculates and 
analyzes all parts of the study area. A total of 3,227 building units were analyzed through a sample of 882 
units taken using stratified random sampling. The units analyzed include houses, shops, as well as vacant 
lots. Hazard components were analyzed based on the density of the buildings and activities involving fires 
where each building has the potential to be the cause of a fire for using fires while cooking, doing 
household activities, or conducting industrial processes. 

2.1 Hazard 

In the study area, the hazard component consists of liquefied petroleum gas/gas tank (LPG) 
warehouses, household and industrial activities, and building density. According to Suprapto (2008), fires 
are flames ignited and spread without deliberation. Fires break out when objects catched by fire go out of 
control and pose a threat to people and properties. A fire incident usually goes through a certain process 
before being put out. Mantra (2005) explains that the process of developing a fire is as follows:  

a) Ignition 

This is marked by a small fire caught by an object in a certain space/room caused by heat energy. 

b) Growth 

Fire grows and spreads depending on how much fuel or flammable materials are nearby—a fuel-
controlled fire. At this point, evacuation is highly recommended during 3-5 minutes before flashover. 

c) Flashover 

A transition period where the whole room is ignited before engulfed in flames. This phase happens 
rapidly with temperatures going from 300 °C up to 600 °C. 

d) Fully developed 

When it is no longer ‘a fire in a room’ rather ‘a room on fire’, the whole room is on fire and the room is 
fully involved. The temperature may reach 1200 °C. 

e) Decay stage 

Fire starts to decay when materials serving as fuel have all been burned out decreasing temperature 
and slowing the rate of the fire. 

Sources of fire hazards in residential areas are usually neglecting activities such as smoking, cooking, use 
of electronics, playing with fire, gas leaks, etc. (Huang, 2009). Fire development is significantly affected by 
the availability of fuel and combustible materials in the course of the fire. In residential areas, building 
materials usually become sources of fire; the more materials there are the bigger the fire there will be. To 
mitigate fire hazards, the time of ignition and size of fire needs to be identified in order to subdue the fire 

http://dx.doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160


 
Sagala et al. / Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 3, No. 2, 2016, 147-160 

doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160 

                                                              

 | 151  
 

before it consumes all the combustible materials in its path. During a developing fire, it is optimal to 
extinguish it before the flashover phase (Mantra, 2005). 

According to Barnwell et al. (2005), fire hazards are often connected to fire exposure. In fire science 
terminology, fire hazards can explain the potential intensity of fires. The term shows the differing 
intensities of fires, and there needs to be a classification of sources of hazards based on potential 
intensities that will affect the size of the fire.  

Fire risk is the probability of a fire igniting that has the potential to injure persons and damage private 
property. The bigger the fire the more damage it causes. Huang (2009) argued that the number of fire 
incidents in residential areas including its population and building characteristics are connected. The 
majority of incidents can be linked to human behavior and personal routines. This is supported by Kai 
Huang’s research in 2009 that stated that human behavior is the number one cause of residential fires. 

2.2 Fire Mitigation in Urban Areas  

According to Cova (1999) disaster mitigation forms a part of disaster mitigation. Mitigation is an effort 
to reduce or eliminate the possibility and/or consequences of hazards. Mitigation is carried out to treat 
hazards in such a way that its effects on society is importantly reduced. Coburn et al. (1994) explain that 
the protection from disaster hazards can be achieved by eliminating the causes of said hazards (reducing 
the risk) or by reducing the effects of hazards when they appear (reducing vulnerability or increasing the 
potential capacity of elements at risk). 

Moga (2002) describe that mitigation planning is the developing of strategies to reduce the impacts of 
disaster on communities, facilities, rural and urban areas, or countries. Mitigation planning can be 
categorized into many groups, most commonly into structural mitigation and non-structural mitigation 
(Moga, 2002). Five types of basic measures that can be used in mitigation planning programs  are as follow: 
engineering and construction measures, physical planning measures, economic measures, institutional and 
management measures, and community action (Coburn et al., 1994). 

Mitigation measures aim to not only prevent loss of human lives and lessen financial loss but also 
decrease adverse effects on socio-economic activities caused by disasters. If sources of mitigation are 
limited, mitigation measures can be targeted towards the most effective element that significantly 
influences community activity. Vulnerability assessments are an important aspect of an effective mitigation 
planning. Vulnerability covers, but is not limited to, risk of physical damage, economic loss, and the lack of 
resources to recover from disasters. 

Moreover, Coburn et al. (1994) stated that disaster mitigation measures can be grouped into either 
passive or active mitigations. Passive mitigation measures are carried out through control or penalties to 
prevent undesired actions such as land use control, mandatory insurance, etc. Active mitigation measures 
are taken to promote desired measures through incentives such as building material subsidies, education 
and training, etc.  

There are countless of ways to carry out fire mitigation measures in order to increase house safety, 
especially from combustible materials, installing smoke detectors (Duncanson et al., 2002). Installing smoke 
detectors is an easy and effective method that serves as a warning system in the case of a fire (Duncanson 
et al., 2002). Community participation is an important component in reducing the number of fire incidents. 
Educating the community is extremely important strategy to prepare them to take appropriate measures in 
the event of a fire (Duncanson et al., 2002). 

2.2.1 Building Density 

Table 2 shows that RW 03 has far more people living in it than others. Building density can be 
calculated by comparing the area of each building with each parcel/block of land. The analysis showed that 
the study area has a building density of about 55.24%-85.31%, which falls under the category of medium to 
high density (Rianta, 2007). 

 

http://dx.doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160
file:///C:/Users/hp/Downloads/10305-23476-1-RV.docx%23_ENREF_3


 
Sagala et al. / Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 3, No. 2, 2016, 147-160 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160 

152 | 
 

Table 2. Demographic characteristics in Sukahaji Village (Sukahaji Village, 2011) 

RW Population 

01 4,127 

02 4,271 

03 5,649 

04 3,240 

2.2.2 Distribution of LPG Warehouses and Tofu Industries 

LPG warehouses and tofu industries/factories are apparent sources of fire hazards in Sukahaji Village. 
Other sources include residential buildings that are too close to each other and made of flammable 
materials. The Table 3 below showcases the fact that RW 03 poses the greatest risk having two tofu 
factories than other RWs.  

Table 3. Distribution of LPG warehouses and tofu industries (Sukahaji Village, 2011) 

No Building RT RW Unit(s) 

1 LPG warehouse 02 02 3 

2 Tofu factory 

02 03 1 

03 03 1 

04 03 2 

05 03 2 

05 04 1 

2.2.3 Vulnerability 

In this study, analyses were carried out in numerous phases. General data such as population data, 
distribution of LPG warehouses, roof materials, wall materials, road width, and sources of water were used 
to give a broad picture of Sukahaji Village. These elements are considered as vulnerabilities for the 
residents include roof and wall materials in the buildings as well as road width and sources of water for 
better access for firefighters. 

a. Roof and Wall Materials 

Roof and wall materials are components used to conduct a fire risk analysis in Sukahaji Village. Based on 
observations done in the field, there are a number of materials used by residents in the study area 
including asbestos, plastic, rattan webbings, zinc, clay tiles, wood, cement, and a combination of bricks and 
cement. There were also buildings that utilized more than one type of materials for its roofing such as a 
combination of clay tiles and plastic, clay tiles with asbestos, clay tiles and zinc, and other combinations. 

Table 4. Roof materials (Sukahaji Village, 2011) 

Classification Roof Type 
Number of 

buildings using it 

Fireproof Cement, zinc, clay tiles and zinc, clay tiles 665 

Easily 
combustible 

Asbestos, wood, plastic 175 

Not easily 
combustible 

Plastic and zinc, bricks and cement, rattan webbings and zinc, clay tiles and 
asbestos, clay tiles and plastic, plastic and zinc 

42 

http://dx.doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160


 
Sagala et al. / Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 3, No. 2, 2016, 147-160 

doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160 

                                                              

 | 153  
 

Wall materials used by the locals moderately vary including rocks, cement, wood, rattan webbings, 
plywood, zinc sheets, plastic sheets, concrete, and glass. Houses using a combination of these materials 
equally existed. Tables 4 and 5 present in detail the material used by Sukahaji locals for their roofing and 
walls. 

Table 5. Wall materials (Sukahaji Village, 2011) 

Classification Type of Wall Buildings using it 

Fireproof 
Bricks; bricks and cement; bricks, cement, and ceramics; 
bricks, cement, and zinc; concrete; glass; ceramics; 
cement; zinc 

661 

Not easily combustible 

Bricks; cement, bamboo; bricks, cement, and rattan 
webbings; bricks, cement, and wood; bricks, cement, and 
zinc sheets; bricks cement, and plywood; bricks, cement, 
and plastic; wood and zinc 

48 

Easily combustible Rattan webbings; wood; wood and rattan webbings 157 

b. Road Width and Sources of Water 

Road width in the study area importantly vary ranging from local roads measuring 0.6 m up to secondary 
roads with 4 m. Road width surrounding the area of study affect the accessibility of fire trucks in the 

event of a fire (Figure 3). The 3.5 m width for roads is minimum required for fire trucks to be able to pass 
through (Figure 4). There are only four roads (Babakan Ciparay Road, Terusan Pasir Koja Road, and two 
local roads) in the study area having the required width of more than 3.5 m. These roads are already well 
paved made out of asphalt and are well maintained and can be used without obstruction by four-wheeled 
vehicles or fire trucks. The area surrounding these wide roads are within access of fire trucks, while as areas 
outside of the roads are not within reach of fire department services if any fire incident breaks out. 

Figure 3. Wall Materials in the Sukahaji (Authors, 2016) 

 

 
 
 

http://dx.doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160


 
Sagala et al. / Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 3, No. 2, 2016, 147-160 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160 

154 | 
 

Figure 4. Road Width in the Sukahaji (Authors, 2016) 

 

 

Sources of water within the study area include wells, the river, waters depots, and local pools/ponds 
(Figure 5). These sources will serve well in the process of extinguishing fires. Thirty-one wells with a total 
water volume of 118,338.8 L in the dry season is accessible. On average, a well has a volume of 4,000 L 
which has the same capacity as one fire truck. It can be used for fire extinguishing to control the flames 
before firefighters arrive. 

In the area, a total of 10 water depots/water reservoirs with a volume 12,480 L is available. Since the 
primary source of water is the local water company (PDAM), the necessary amount of water for 
extinguishing fires is fulfilled. This particular source has been used to extinguish fire incidents in RT12, 
RW02 to compensate the fact that firefighters have very little access to the site of the fire. It is clear that 
water depots have been proved to be an effective alternative in extinguishing the fire. 

Figure 5. River ponds/pools as a source of water (Authors, 2016) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://dx.doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160


 
Sagala et al. / Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 3, No. 2, 2016, 147-160 

doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160 

                                                              

 | 155  
 

There are 8 ponds with a total volume of 148,000 L, averaging 18,500 L each pond. This source of water 
can be effective in extinguishing fires as it can serve as a reservoir for fire trucks. There is a river that flows 
through the study area with a flow rate of 80 L/s or equals to 24,000 /m. this source of water can be used 
to supply water to fire trucks and help in fire extinguishing efforts. Areas that have sources of water and 
can access them are said to be areas provided with a water source, while areas without a source of water 
are areas that are not provided with sources of water. 

c. Risks of Fires in Sukahaji Village 

Based on statistical data of Sukahaji Village, a fire risk map was created using GIS focusing on RWs 01-
04. An illustration of the spatial aspects of the risks is provided in Figure 6. To determine the level of fire 
risk in Sukahaji Village, a classification was made based on fire risk analysis. This risk classification is relative 
to the area of study, meaning that it may not be suitable for other areas prone to fires. Nevertheless, this 
classification relative to the area can be used as a reference for deciding fire mitigation measures. 

 

Figure 6. Map of fire risks in Sukahaji Village (Analysis, 2016) 

 
 

http://dx.doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160


 
Sagala et al. / Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 3, No. 2, 2016, 147-160 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160 

156 | 
 

Buildings counted to have a High Risk of catching fire indicate its proximity to a source of hazard (LPG 
warehouse and tofu factory) and are made of not-easily-combustible building materials. Buildings classified 
as having a Medium Risk of catching fire indicates its proximity (not as close as before) to a source of 
hazard and are made of easily-combustible building materials. The last category classifies buildings with a 
Low Risk as buildings that are not in proximity to a source of hazard and are made of fireproof materials. It 
can also mean that these are open lots. 

From the risk analysis, it has been found out that most of the study area is classified under Medium Risk, 
which is 61.17% of the total buildings (1,974 building units). The other 1,193 units are classified as having a 
High Risk, i.e. 36.97% of the total buildings. Unfortunately, only 60 buildings can be classified as Low Risk 
counting 1.86% of the total buildings. 

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 

Based on the results of Sukahaji’s risk analysis, numerous mitigation scenarios were produced. A 
comparison showing the different results of spatial risk calculations from the produced scenarios is 
presented in Figure 7. In general, two fire mitigation scenarios were made each one with a different 
intervention than the other. The first scenario will intervene by including capacity (C) variables in 
calculating fire risk. These variables are sources of water and road width adequate for fire trucks to pass 
through. From the risk analysis using capacity variables, it is discovered that the number of buildings 
categorized as having a High Risk is 262 units (8.12 %). The number of buildings having a Medium Risk sums 
up to be 417 units (12.92 %), whereas buildings with a Low Risk goes up to 2548 units (78.92 %). The 
second scenario is to intervene at the hazard (H) component of the risk analysis. This hazard component 
consists of tofu factories and LPG warehouses as well as population density.  

Based on the analysis, it is known that this mitigation measure has a significant impact on the study 
area. This impact can be observed by the decline of risk in the area that will affect the degree and the 
amount of damage and loss of private property as well as life. The risk analysis shows that a number of 805 
units (23.94 %) of buildings having High Risk, up to 2362 buildings having Medium Risk (73.19 %), and 805 
units (24.95 %) having Low Risk. This section will discuss the findings resulted from the analysis. The figures 
7-8 show the three scenarios in which different interventions are taken.  

Mitigation scenarios can be carried out through approaches on capacity (C) and hazards (H). The first 
scenario can be done by intervening risk and taking into account the capacity variable. It can be 
accomplished by supplying and installing a water container constantly available for firefighters during fire 
extinguishing efforts. Improving road conditions is another way to facilitate maneuverability of fire trucks in 
the event of a fire. 

As sources of water in the location, there should be water containers (for example 2 panel tanks with a 
capacity of 520 L each) equipped with wheels to help the locals transport the tanks to the location of the 
fire. These tanks should always be filled with water to be used in the case of a fire. Furthermore, 
identification markers for each tank are necessary to facilitate locals recognizing them as a source of water. 

With these efforts, sources of water are expected to be easily accessed within Sukahaji. The roads 
reparation in the study area is suggested in order to facilitate fire trucks in the case of a fire. Moreover, 
certain important roads need to be expanded to increase maneuverability of the fire trucks. Total 
expansion of road is not possible due to the high building density in some areas. These rebuilding efforts 
should not cause damage to the surrounding villagers. 

The second mitigation scenario can be carried out by alleviating the hazard (H) variable through 

engineering and construction. This measure will separate or relocate sources of danger from populated 

areas. Household activities are part of these areas and cannot be moved. Instead, sources of danger, such 

as LPG warehouses and tofu factories, should be relocated. These sources of danger can be moved to their 

proper land uses. Form of law or regulation should be enforced to delineate the prohibition of industrial 

activities and storing flammable materials within residential areas. 

 

http://dx.doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160


 
Sagala et al. / Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 3, No. 2, 2016, 147-160 

doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160 

                                                              

 | 157  
 

Figure 7. Comparing risks of numerous fire mitigation interventions (Analysis, 2016) 

 

No Intervention 

     

Intervention 1    Intervention 2 

http://dx.doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160


 
Sagala et al. / Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 3, No. 2, 2016, 147-160 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160 

158 | 
 

Effort to decrease the density of buildings within Sukahaji would be nearly impossible as there would be 
mass evictions and demolitions. There would also be issues of who would be evicted and whose house 
would be demolished. From the risk analysis and mitigation scenarios in the previous part, type of 
mitigation would have the most significant impact for number of units with a High Risk. A comparison 
between numbers of buildings with a High Risk after each mitigation scenario is illustrated in Figure 8. 

From the graph below, it can be concluded that if the building materials are replaced with fire resistant 
ones (the first mitigation scenario), it will dramatically decrease the number of buildings with a High Risk. It 
is proven to be more effective than relocating LPG warehouses and tofu factories (the second intervention). 
Even then, optimal effort can be achieved if a combination of the first and second scenario can be executed 
in Sukahaji. 

Figure 8. Number of buildings with a high risk after application  
of each mitigation scenario (Analysis, 2016) 

 

 

This study seeks to explore fire mitigation scenarios in densely populated settlements and also learn the 
lesson to be potentially and further applied elsewhere in Indonesia. The area of study, RWs 01-04, mostly 
consists of buildings with a Medium Risk of catching fire. This classification is relative towards the study 
area, meaning that risk classification within Sukahaji cannot be compared with other areas as they will have 
specific sources of hazards and vulnerabilities. Based on the analysis it is known that mitigation through 
optimizing local human capacity can be a primary alternative in handling fire risks within the area of study. 
Overall, Sukahaji is considered to have medium-high population density (Rianta, 2007), which means that 
optimizing local capacity can be a primary choice in handling fire risks within medium-high density 
populated settlements. 

In case of capacity variable (C), optimizing capacity can be realized by providing more water hydrants or 
other sources of water available during the event of a fire. Furthermore, widening of roads is 
correspondingly essential for fire trucks accessibility to incident locations since densely populated 
settlements usually have narrow roads. In case of fire, it hampers fire extinguishing efforts and delays the 
safety of the surrounding environment.  

Coburn et al. (1994) stated that five types of basic measures can be utilized in mitigation planning 
programs such as engineering and construction measures, physical planning measures, economic 
measures, institutional and management measures, and community action. From the previous mitigation 
scenarios, only engineering (relocating sources of hazards, road widening, etc.) and construction measures 
(replacing combustible materials with fire resistant ones) were applied. Community participation and early 
warning systems are other interventions that can be done. Community participation is an important 

http://dx.doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160


 
Sagala et al. / Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 3, No. 2, 2016, 147-160 

doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160 

                                                              

 | 159  
 

component that should be utilized in reducing fire risk. In order for communities to actively participate in 
risk reduction, providing adequate information including its dissemination is imperative. Community based 
mitigation efforts should be integrated with all levels of society (schools, government officials, and other 
groups) (Duncanson et al., 2002). This has to do so that the community understands important things (to do 
list) during an emergency. Training, counseling, as well as evacuation simulations during a fictitious fire are 
several important activities in community-based mitigation efforts. 

In addition, Sukahaji can additionally install a fire alarm as a fire mitigation effort. Installing smoke-
detecting fire alarms is an easy and effective method that can serve as an early warning system (Duncanson 
et al., 2002). Installing fire alarms in fire prone areas can increase community alertness and preparedness. If 
the warning systems go off, the locals can act quickly and subdue the fire before it spreads even further. 

Physical planning measures are a form of mitigation planning that can be applied in disaster prone areas. 
In the context of the Indonesian urban fires, detailed plans (RDTR) and building layouts (RTBL) should be 
referred as documents governing these kinds of physical planning. As it has been discussed before, a 
primary alternative for mitigation is optimizing capacity (supplying sources of water and widening roads); 
thus this needs to be included in RDTRs and RTBLs. This can be done by supplying more water hydrants and 
other sources of water. Evacuation routes can also fit as additional elements in RDTRs/RTBLs as 
community-based mitigation efforts. 

4. CONCLUSION 

This study explores fire mitigation scenarios in densely populated settlements and has contributed to 
the limited literature on fire mitigation in Indonesia, especially that of urban fires. The results produced 
some mitigation scenarios such as intervention on the risk component as it can reduce the overall risk 
within Sukahaji, Bandung, potentially applied elsewhere in Indonesia. Optimizing capacity as a mitigation 
measure can be a primary alternative in handling fire hazards in areas with medium-high population 
density. Furthermore, an early warning system is discovered as an important factor in mitigation efforts. 
Therefore, it should be taken into account to optimize the risk reduction efforts in fire-prone areas. It 
promotes the involvement of community-based approach utilizing the local and existing resources within 
the community. Furthermore, this study can be integrated with the programs for fire mitigation by local 
governmental agencies, particularly the Fire Department (Dinas Pemadaman Kebakaran), Local Disaster 
Management Agency (Badan Penanggulangan Bencana Daerah; BPBD), and agencies related to the 
approval of building permits. Fire mitigation can be carried out at the earliest stage if the building density is 
taken into consideration. 

5. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

The authors are thankful for assistance and comments provided by Resilience Development Initiative 
(RDI) members, Elisabeth Rianawati, and Ramanditya Wimbardana. 

6. REFERENCES 

Bandung Central Bureau of Statistics. (2009). Bandung in Figures 2009. Bandung. 
Barnwell, C., et al. (2005). Urban wildfire exposure modeling in the municipality of Anchorage, Alaska. In 

ESRI User Conference. 
Coburn, A. W., et al. (1994). Mitigasi Bencana 2nd ed. Program Pelatihan Manajemen Bencana, UNDP. 
Cova, T. J. (1999). GIS in emergency management. Geographical Information Systems, 2, 845–858. 
Duncanson, M., et al. (2002). Socioeconomic deprivation and fatal unintentional domestic fire incidents in 

New Zealand 1993-1998. Fire Safety Journal, 37(2), 165–179. http://doi.org/10.1016/s0379-
7112(01)00033-9 

Dwijayanti, F. (2008). Mitigasi Bencana Kebakaran di Permukiman Padat Kecamatan Bojongloa Kaler (Studi 
Kasus : Kelurahan Babakan Asih dan Kelurahan Jamika). Institut Teknologi Bandung. Retrieved from 
http://digilib.itb.ac.id/files/disk1/673/jbptitbpp-gdl-fajaresthy-33603-1-2008ta-r.pdf 

Huang, K. (2009). Population and building factors that impact residential fire rates in large US cities. 
IFRC. (2010). World disaster report. Retrieved from http://www.ifrc.org/Global/Publications/disasters/ 

WDR/WDR2010-full.pdf 

http://dx.doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160


 
Sagala et al. / Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 3, No. 2, 2016, 147-160 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160 

160 | 
 

Indonesian Government. (2007). Law no 24/2007 Disaster Management. 
Mantra, I. B. G. W. (2005). Kajian Penanggulangan Bahaya Kebakaran Pada Perumahan (Suatu Kajian 

Pendahuluan di Perumahan Sarijadi Bandung). Jurnal Permukiman Natah, 3(1), 24–33. 
Moga, J. (2002). Disaster mitigation planning: the growth of local partnerships for disaster reduction. In 

Regional Workshop on Best Practices in Disaster Mitigation--Lessons Learned from the Asian Urban 
Disaster Mitigation Program and other Initiatives (pp. 24–26). 

Prathama, F. P. (2011). Persepsi Risiko dan Kesiapsiagaan Penduduk Dalam Menghadapi Bahaya Kebakaran 
di Permukiman Padat (Studi Kasus: Kelurahan Sukahaji, Kota Bandung). Institut Teknologi Bandung. 

Rianta, E. (2007). Pemetaan Risiko Bermacam Bahaya LIngkungan di Kelurahan Kampung Melayu, Cipinang 
Besar Utara dan Penjaringan Provinsi DKI Jakarta. Jakarta. 

Sagala, S., et al. (2014). Perilaku dan Kesiapsiagaan Terkait Kebakaran pada Penghuni Permukiman Padat 
Kota Bandung. Forum Geografi, 28(1), 1–20. 

Suprapto. (2008). Tinjauan Eksistensi Standar-Standar Proteksi Kebakaran dan Penerapannya dalam 
Mendukung Implementasi Peraturan Keselamatan Bangunan. Bandung. 

Tarigan, A. K. M., et al. (2016). Bandung City, Indonesia. Cities, 50, 100–110. 
Wahyudi, A. (2004). Identifikasi Tingkat Risiko Kebakaran Menggunakan SIG (Studi Kasus: Kota Bandung). 

Institut Teknologi Bandung. 
Xin, J., & Huang, C. (2013). Fire risk analysis of residential buildings based on scenario clusters and its 

application in fire risk management. Fire Safety Journal, 62, 72–78. 
Zhou, B. (2013). Analysis of fire hazards of billboards on exterior walls of buildings and fire control safety 

countermeasures. Procedia Engineering, 52, 693–696. 
 

http://dx.doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.3.2.147-160

