Figure 6: Tombak Sulu-sulu, Aek Sipangolu,
Sisingamangaraja Palace
The application of the Batak Culture is also
needed in the preservation of tourist objects located
in Geopark Bakara tourist sites. The use of
ornamental plants can also be applied in Geopark
Bakara. These plants can be used one of them for the
benefit of tourism. A row of ornamental plants can
complement the shrub trees around the location of
Bakara tourism objects. The use of ornamental plants
is one of the efforts in environmental preservation can
also improve the economy and welfare of ornamental
plant farmers in the Bakara area.
5 CONCLUSIONS
Sipiso-Piso Waterfall, seen from the land use is good
enough. The three elements of land use, namely land
use intensity, land function, and relationships
between functions are quite good. However, even so
there are still some deficiencies in these three
elements. In the element of land use intensity because
there is no land use plan, there are some unplanned
viewpoint developments. In the element of land
function, there is still an important function in the
geotourism area which is not owned by Sipiso-Piso
Waterfall, namely Stoppoint and information centers
and irregular parking spaces. In the element of
relationship between functions, circulation for
pedestrian pathways is still not good and adequate.
Therefore, this paper provides the concept of land use
planning to address these problems. Unfortunately,
not all problems can be solved by conceptualizing
land use planning, such as the problem of less
representative building design and less geotourism
activities that cannot be resolved. Therefore, the
author recommends a study of other tourism area
planning elements in the Sipiso-Piso Waterfall
geotourism area to complete this research.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors thankfully that the research is supported
by Universitas Sumatera Utara. The support is under
the research grant of number
252/UN5.2.3.1/PPM/KP-DRPM/2018 Year 2018.,
and this research also supported by Sustainable
tourism working Group of Universitas Sumatera
Utara.
REFERENCES
N. Ginting and J. Wahid, “Recalling the Past: Maintaining
continuity in urban heritage tourism,” J. ASIAN Behav.
Stud., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 81–89, 2016.
J.-P. Pralong, “A method for assessing tourist potential and
use of geomorphological sites,” Géomorphologie Reli.
Process. Environ., vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 189–196, 2005.
N. Ginting and N. V. Rahman, “Maimoon Palace Heritage
District in Medan, Indonesia: What we preserve and
why we preserve?,” Procedia-Social Behav. Sci., vol.
222, pp. 332–341, 2016.
H. Shirvani, The urban design process. Van Nostrand
Reinhold Company, 1985.
C. Goodwin, J. M. Ingham, and G. Tonks, “Identifying
heritage value in URM buildings,” 2009.
R. K. Dowling, “Geotourism’s Global Growth,”
Geoheritage, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–13, 2011.
N. Azman, S. A. Halim, O. P. Liu, S. Saidin, and I. Komoo,
“Public education in heritage conservation for geopark
community,” Procedia-Social Behav. Sci., vol. 7, pp.
504–511, 2010.
Ginting, N., & Sasmita, A. (2018). Developing tourism
facilities based on geotourism in Silalahi Village,
Geopark Toba Caldera. In IOP Conference Series:
Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 126).
https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/126/1/012163
Ginting, N., & Febriandy, F. (2018). Implementation of
geotourism concept in developing natural tourist