







































 | 257  
 

         Geoplanning 
Vol 4, No 2, 2017, 257-262                                                                                                                                                            Journal of Geomatics and Planning 

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

doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.4.2.257-262  

ASSESSING THE USEFULNESS OF UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE (UAV) FOR 
MONITORING SPATIAL PLAN: LEGAL AND USER PERSPECTIVE OF BOGOR 
REGENCY, INDONESIA 

D. Mariaa, F. Hamdania, J. Pratomoa           , M.A. Pratamaa, G. S. A Bidaria, S. Sheridaa 

a Lokalaras Indonesia Institute, Indonesia.  
 

Abstract: Monitoring is a critical process in managing the land use plan. However, the current 

approach to collecting data related to the land use has a shortcoming. First, field survey has 
limitation due to the high number of resources needed, i.e., people, funds, time. Second, the 
participatory approach has limitation due to the lack of involvement of the citizens. Unmanned 
Aerial Vehicle (UAV) has developed in recent years and it has been used in the various field, i.e., 
urban dynamics, asset monitoring, and so on. The usage of UAV to monitor urban changes has 
some advantages. First, it can cover a large area and used fewer resources compared with the 
field survey, in term of man hour, funds and time. Second, it may provide data with a high spatial 
resolution, which gives a broad possibility for analyzing urban features. This research aimed to 
assess the usefulness of UAV in monitoring the spatial plan of Bogor Regency, Indonesia. We 
developed indicator according to the legal and user perspective. Our research has shown that 
UAV may reduce the time and resources needed to monitor the spatial plan. However, the UAV 
has limitation since it is difficult to indicate the changes of the land use. Therefore, we suggest 
incorporating with the field survey. 

Copyright © 2017 GJGP-UNDIP  
This open access article is distributed under a  

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

How to site (APA 6th Style):  Maria, D., Hamdani, F., Pratomo, J., Pratama, M. A., Bidari, G. S. A., Sherida, S. (2017). Assessing the Usefulness of 
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) For Monitoring Spat1ial Plan: Legal and User Perspective of Bogor Regency, Indonesia: Journal of Geomatics and 
Planning, 4(2), 257-262 doi:10.14710/geoplanning.4.2.257-262. 

1. INTRODUCTION  

Monitoring is a critical process in managing the spatial plan to ensure the compliance of the 
implementation process (Government of The Republic of Indonesia, 2007). In Indonesia, the monitoring 
process is divided into two categories, i.e., technical and specific monitoring (Government of The Republic 
of Indonesia, 2010). Technical monitoring consists of procedures, output, functions and benefits, and 
monitoring the achievement of standards of minimum service. Meanwhile, the specific monitoring includes 
data and information and technical study on specific problems. 

Although monitoring process is crucial, current approach for data collection regarding spatial planning 
has limitations. First, field survey has limitation due to the high number of resources needed, i.e., people, 
funds, time. Second, the participatory approach has limitation due to the lack of involvement of the 
citizens. Another method, which is satellite based imagery also has limitation due to the impact of 
atmospheric conditions. 

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) has developed in recent years and it has been used in the various field, 
i.e., urban dynamics and asset monitoring. According to Kršák et al. (2016)  UAV can be used to create new 
opportunities for documentation since it can measure the surface in detail, create orthophoto maps of the 
entire area and documents the difficult areas. Furthermore, the usage of UAV may cover a large area and 
used fewer resources compared with the field survey, in term of man hour, funds and time. UAV also may 
provide data with a high spatial resolution, which gives a broad possibility for various applications. Several 
studies have demonstrated the usage of UAV in an urban area. For instance, research from Salvo et al.  
(2014) has shown the usage of UAV for urban traffic analysis. Another research from Chen et al. (2016) 
developed a robust method for detecting building change from UAV image. 

 

Article Info: 
Received: 13 January 2017 
in revised form: 10 July 2017 
Accepted: 1 August 2017 
Available Online:  30 Oct 2017 
 

Keywords:  
Spatial Plan, UAV, Monitoring, Legal 
Perspective, User Perspective 
 

Corresponding Author: 
Jati Pratomo 
Lokalaras Indonesia Institute, 
Indonesia 
Email: jati@lokalaras.org 

OPEN ACCESS 

https://doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.4.2.257-262
mailto:jati@lokalaras.org


 
Maria et al./ Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 4, No 2, 2017, 257-262 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.4.2.257-262 

 

258 | 
 

As the buffer city of Jakarta, Bogor Regency experienced a rapid urbanisation, which led to an increased 
demand for land. Three factors have contributed to the land demands, i.e., population growth, structural 
change of the society and the economic developments (Fajarini, 2014). The impact of the rapid 
urbanization results in various forms of environmental degradation and the probability of violation in the 
spatial plan. Therefore, the local government is required to monitor the spatial plan regularly to prevent 
violations.  

However, to monitor the implementation of spatial planning also have an issue. According to the 
Indonesian National Law Number 26/2007, the General Spatial Plan (RTRW) cannot be used for monitoring 
due to the lack detailed information (Purba, 2015). However, local governments rarely have the detailed 
spatial plan (RDTR), which may be used for monitoring the spatial plan. Often, they develop their procedure 
for this purpose. Therefore, it is necessary to indicate the requirement for monitoring from the legal and 
the user perspective. 

Currently, the government of Bogor Regency used field survey for data acquisition. Although the size of 
Bogor Regency is large, which is 2.664 square kilometer, the number of people-in-charge for monitoring 
process is limited. The Government of Bogor Regency itself has set the target for monitoring land use for 
more than 1,000 land parcels per year. However, they can accommodate only 200 cases per year. This 
research aimed to assess the usefulness of UAV in monitoring the spatial plan of Bogor Regency, Indonesia 
according to the legal and user perspective. 

 

2. DATA AND METHODS  

To evaluate the usefulness of UAV in monitoring the spatial plan, we developed a set of indicators from 
the two sources. First, we conducted a literature review related to the legal requirement for monitoring the 
spatial plan. Second, we conducted an interview, to understand the needs and requirement of the user. 
According to these two sources, we developed a set of indicators. The qualitative evaluation was done by 
comparing the requirement of the monitoring process by the UAV’s feature. To elaborate the capability of 
UAV to fulfil the requirement, we conducted a literature review. By the end, we came out with a matrix 
that indicates the usefulness of the UAV for monitoring the spatial plan, particularly in Bogor Regency. The 
methods used in this research can be seen in Figure 1. 

 

Legal Requirement User Requirement

Literature Review User Interview

Evaluations indicators

UAV Features

Usefulness of UAV

 

Figure 1. Research Methods 

3. RESULT AND DISCUSSION 

3.1. Legal Requirement 
Two components are needed to be considered in monitoring the spatial plan, which is structure and 

pattern (Ministry of Public Works and Public Housing, 2015). Regarding monitoring the structure, some 

https://doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.4.2.257-262


 
Maria et al./ Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 4, No 2, 2017, 257-262 

doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.4.2.257-262 
                                                              

 | 259  
 

information needs to be collected. First, the change of urban center. Second, the change of the main 
infrastructure. Last, the change of utility. Meanwhile, monitoring pattern consists of three measurements. 
First, changes in the environmental protected area. Second, changes of open green space. Third, changes in 
the built-up area. 

Acquisition of the data mentioned above is needed to indicate and prevent the violation of spatial 
plan. Several patterns can be classified as a violation of the spatial plan. First, conversion of the land use. 
Second, permit does not comply with the spatial plan. Third, a spatial plan does not matches with the 
actual conditions. Fourth, development without a licence. Fifth, inaccuracy of data. Sixth, administrative 
violations during the licensing process. The last is construction of particular parcels affecting the 
accessibility of public facilities.  
3.2. User Requirement 

The monitoring process of the spatial plan in Bogor Regency is carried out by the Department of 
Spatial Planning and Land Management (DTRP). DTRP developed a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) 
regarding the monitoring of the spatial plan. To conduct the monitoring process, DTRP also needs to 
cooperate with other working units, e.g. Board of Investment and Integrated Permit (BPTSP) and Civil 
Service Police (Satpol PP). DTRP Bogor serves as the first substation in monitoring activities as the issuance 
of the construction permit. Further intensive of monitoring activities are escorted by a unit of the 
Department of Building Management and Housing (DTBP) to minimise the infringement.  

Regarding the procedure, DTRP started by conducting a field survey for every permitted that 
submitted to BPTSP. If violations are found, DTRP will issue a warning letter. If the offender does not settle 
the issue after the third warning, then the government has any right to dismantle or revoke the landowner 
permits. However, due to the limited resources, DTRP needs to create a priority, which developed 
according to the preliminary information obtained from district authorities, also information from the 
citizens. Regarding the time that consumed is depends on the area and the parcels that surveyed. For the 
parcels sized one hectare in the industrial area, it can be done by one day. Meanwhile, for the parcels in a 
densely populated residential, it required up to four days. 

3.3. Development of Indicators  
As discussed in introductions, we developed a set of indicators according to the legal and user 

perspective. From the legal point of view, we noticed that three activities need to monitors, which are 
monitoring urban structure, urban patterns and avoiding violations. Meanwhile, from the user perspective, 
we noticed that the user requires methods that may reduce the resources needed and increasing the 
collaboration among stakeholders. Therefore, we can summarise the indicators that can be used for 
evaluations, which can be seen in Table 1. 

 
Table 1. Indicators of Evaluations 

Perspective Category Indicators 

Legal Managing urban 
structure 

1 Development of the Urban Centre 

2 Development of the Infrastructure 

3 Development of the utility 

Managing urban 
patterns 

4 Changes in environmental protection area 

5 Changes of the green-open-space 

6 Changes in the built-up area 

Avoiding Violations 7 Land use conversion 

8 Difference between permit and spatial plan 

9 Difference between spatial plan and actual conditions 

10 Development without permit 

11 Inaccurate data 

12 Administrative violations 

13 Construction that blocked access to public space 

User Reducing Resources 14 Reducing the time for data collection 

15 Reducing the needs of manpower 

Collaboration 16 Increasing collaborations among stakeholders 

https://doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.4.2.257-262


 
Maria et al./ Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 4, No 2, 2017, 257-262 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.4.2.257-262 

 

260 | 
 

3.4. Evaluations 

Regarding change monitoring of urban center, it requires data that periodically collected. The change of 
urban center might be observed by the change of the built-up area. For this requirement, the usage of UAV 
has an advantage due to its ability to be deployed in the particular area and various time. Several studies 
have shown the usefulness of UAV to acquire spatiotemporal data. For instance, Kim et al. (2016) employed 
multi temporal SAR data obtained from UAV for detecting durable and permanent changes in urban areas. 
Another study from Rosnell et al. (2011) tested the performance of image acquired from UAV in different 
seasons (winter, spring, summer, autumn) and conditions (sunny, cloudy, various solar elevations). 

For the second and third indicator, which are infrastructure and utilities, the usage of UAV has 
advantages due to the high spatial resolutions. Current UAV camera may produce an image with 6 
centimetres on the spatial resolution. The usage of very high resolution (VHR) may assist the detection of 
the small object. Regarding the application of UAV for monitoring infrastructure and utility has 
demonstrated in some research. For instance, Salvo et al. (2014) used the UAV for monitoring the traffic. 
Another research from Sankarasrinivasan et al. (2015) used the UAV to monitor the condition of the 
building structure. 

Similar with the advantage of the UAV in monitoring urban center, infrastructure and utility, monitoring 
urban pattern also require methods that may acquire multi-temporal data with appropriate spatial 
resolutions. However, apart from nthese two requirements, monitoring urban pattern also needs a 
platform that can cover a large area. Current development of the UAV technology has created a platform 
with outstanding coverage and endurance, e.g., Orion Medium-Altitude Long Endurance UAV (Figure 2) 
have a flight radius of 4,000 miles and can fly for 120 hours. 

 

 
Figure 2. Orion UAV 

Although the usage of UAV has demonstrated its usefulness in the first to the sixth indicator, apparently 
it has a limitation in monitoring land use conversion. Similar to different image acquisition methods, i.e., 
satellite imagery, not every land use class can easily detect from the image. For instance, office and the 
commercial area often have similar characteristics. Also, it is hard to distinguish between the public park 
and the vacant land. Hence, observing the land use from the ground is the most obvious approach. 
Although, some land use may be observed from the image, e.g., rice field and water body. 

Since it is hard to monitor the land use from the UAV, it is also difficult to monitor the difference 
between a permit and spatial plan (indicator number eight) as well as the difference between spatial plan 
and actual conditions (indicator number nine). UAV also have limited use to solve the problems related to 
the accuracy of the land use data (indicator number 11). However, the UAV might be used to monitor 
development without a permit (indicator number ten), by comparing acquired image with the GIS data of 
building permit. We will indicate the violation if we find any changes in the particular area that do not have 
a building permit. 

UAV have a limited use for detecting construction site that blocked access to public space. In this case, 
we need to define the relationship between construction sites, public facilities and the access to the public 

https://doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.4.2.257-262


 
Maria et al./ Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 4, No 2, 2017, 257-262 

doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.4.2.257-262 
                                                              

 | 261  
 

facilities. Furthermore, often the access itself is hard to define from the image. For instance, a vacant land 
has used as access to a public park. Hence, this case only can be detected by the local knowledge. 
Regarding the administrative process, UAV is of course not possible to detect this violations. 

Regarding the user perception, the UAV is useful in term of reducing the time and manpower needed for 
data collections. Therefore, it can impact on the availability of up-to-date data that also can be used to 
increase the collaboration among stakeholders. 

According to the above discussion, we summaries the usefulness of the UAV in Table 2. 

Table 2. Summary of the Evaluations 

Indicators Usefulness 

Useful Limited Not useful 

1 Development of the Urban Centre √   

2 Development of the Infrastructure √   

3 Development of the utility √   

4 Changes in environmental protection area √   

5 Changes of the green-open-space √   

6 Changes in the built-up area √   

7 Land use conversion  √  

8 Difference between permit and spatial plan  √  

9 Difference between spatial plan and actual 
conditions 

 √  

10 Development without permit √   

11 Inaccurate data  √  

12 Administrative violations   √ 

13 Construction that blocked access to public space   √ 

14 Reducing the time for data collection √   

15 Reducing the needs of manpower √   

16 Increasing collaborations among stakeholders √   

 

4. CONCLUSION 

Our research has demonstrated the usage of UAV for monitoring the spatial plan. The combination of 
the legal and user perspective also gives a better understanding for assessing the usage of the UAV. 
However, UAV also has a limited usage in monitoring land use, which also similar with different image 
acquisition methods, i.e., satellite imagery. Since only particular land use that can be detected, 
incorporating with the field data is needed. In term of user perspective, UAV gives a better opportunity 
compared with the field survey in term of reducing the time and manpower needed. 

 

5. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

Funding for this research is obtained from Lokalaras Indonesia Institute. We also grateful by the support 
from the Government of Bogor Regency. 

 

6. REFERENCES 

Chen, B., Chen, Z., Deng, L., Duan, Y., & Zhou, J. (2016). Building change detection with RGB-D map 
generated from UAV images. Neurocomputing, 1–15. [Crossref] 

Fajarini, R. (2014). The Dynamics of Land Use Change and the Spatial Plan of Bogor Regency (in bahasa). 
Bogor Agriculture Institute. Retrieved from 
http://repository.ipb.ac.id/handle/123456789/73120?show=full). 

https://doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.4.2.257-262
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2015.11.118


 
Maria et al./ Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 4, No 2, 2017, 257-262 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.4.2.257-262 

 

262 | 
 

Government of The Republic of Indonesia. National Law of Spatial Planning (in bahasa), Pub. L. No. 26/2007 
(2007). Indonesia. 

Government of The Republic of Indonesia. Implementation of Spatial Planning (in bahasa), Pub. L. No. 
15/2010 (2010). Indonesia. 

Kim, D. J., Hensley, S., Yun, S. H., & Neumann, M. (2016). Detection of Durable and Permanent Changes in 
Urban Areas Using Multitemporal Polarimetric UAVSAR Data. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing 
Letters, 13(2), 267–271. [Crossref] 

Kršák, B., Blišťan, P., Pauliková, A., Puškárová, P., Kovanič, Ľ., Palková, J., & Zelizňaková, V. (2016). Use of 
low-cost UAV photogrammetry to analyse the accuracy of a digital elevation model in a case study. 
Measurement. [Crossref] 

Ministry of Public Works and Public Housing. (2015). Draft of Technical Documents on Monitoring and 
Evaluation of Spatial Planning (in bahasa). 

Purba, T. P. (2015). Audit of Spatial Plan in Indonesia: expectation and implementation (in bahasa). 
Retrieved from 
https://www.academia.edu/12785507/Audit_Tata_Ruang_di_Indonesia_Harapan_dan_Tindak_Lanju
t  

Rosnell, T., Honkavaara, E., & Nurminen, K. (2011). On Geometric Processing of Multi-Temporal Image Data 
Collected By Light UAV Systems. ISPRS - International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote 
Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, XXXVIII-1/, 63–68. [Crossref] 

Salvo, G., Caruso, L., & Scordo, A. (2014). Urban Traffic Analysis through an UAV. Procedia - Social and 
Behavioral Sciences, 111, 1083–1091. [Crossref] 

Sankarasrinivasan, S., Balasubramanian, E., Karthik, K., Chandrasekar, U., & Gupta, R. (2015). Health 
Monitoring of Civil Structures with Integrated UAV and Image Processing System. Procedia Computer 
Science, 54, 508–515.  [Crossref] 

 

https://doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.4.2.257-262
http://doi.org/10.1109/LGRS.2015.2509080
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2016.05.028
http://doi.org/10.5194/isprsarchives-XXXVIII-1-C22-63-2011
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.143
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.06.058

