Flood Risk Assessment of Heritage Building in Semarang City

Roi Milyardi

Deni Setiawan

and Tri Octaviani Sihombing

Department of Civil Engineering, Universitas Kristen Maranatha, Bandung, Indonesia

Keywords: Flood Risk Assessment, Heritage Building, Disaster Risk Management, Hazard, Vulnerability.

Abstract: Semarang City as one of the cities in Indonesia which is a flood-prone area, has historic buildings that are still

functioning. The preservation of heritage building is very important, so it is necessary to carry out a building

risk assessment in order to determine the safety limits of the building. This study aims to carry out a risk

assessment of flood disasters in heritage buildings in the city of Semarang. The methodology used is a risk

assessment carried out with a Risk assessment instrument from the guidelines of the BNPB which is

elaborated with several previous studies conducted on 6 case studies of heritage temple building in Semarang

City. The variables used in this risk assessment are flood hazard, vulnerability (involving of proximity to the

river, building area, building elevation, building materials and conditions), and capacity. The results of the

flood risk assessment showed that 2 temples had a low risk of flooding, and the others were at moderate risk.

The findings in this study, although the 6 case studies are located close to river, the impact of flood risk can

be controlled significantly by the financial sustainable management of cultural heritage buildings as one of

the flood preparedness.

1 INTRODUCTION

The assessment of natural disaster risk in an area or

specifically on buildings has been widely developed

by previous studies. In general, the Crunch model is

the basis for risk assessment in studies that have been

carried out (Hai & Smyth, 2012; Twigg, 2015). The

crunch risk model models disaster risk with

components of vulnerability, hazard and capacity.

Recently development of natural disaster risk models

adds an exposure component and external factors.

The development of a risk model is generally used to

determine the risk component parameters (hazard,

vulnerability, exposure, and capacity) of each

component in accordance with the characteristics of

the conditions in an area.

Assessment of the risk of flooding in cultural

reserve buildings has been carried out in many

previous studies in various countries in the world. The

most significant variation in assessing flood risk in a

cultural heritage is in the component of vulnerability.

Vulnerability components are determined through

architectural style parameters, legal status of cultural

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3025-1356

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0335-2111

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4630-8727

heritage, number of floors, building materials,

maintenance and operating conditions, rainfall until

determined through a flood simulation (Stephenson &

D’Ayala, 2014; Wang, 2014).

Semarang city as the provincial capital in Central

Java which is located in the area of the north coast of

Java has a chronic flood problem. Several previous

studies have shown that community-based disaster

mitigation is quite effective for short-term flood

disaster mitigation in the city of Semarang

(Handayani et al., 2019; Miladan, 2016). Other

research proposes mitigation based on public policies

to reduce urbanization which causes flooding

(Handayani et al., 2020). The age of the city is quite

old (474 years in 2021), making Semarang has quite

a lot of cultural heritage buildings. Due to the flood

problem, various efforts have been made to conserve

cultural heritage buildings from the risk of flooding.

In 2018, UNESCO and the team conducted an initial

strategy study to protect cultural heritage buildings in

Semarang from the danger of flooding with several

short-term strategies, in the form of disaster responses

simulations, early warning systems, etc., as well as

200

Milyardi, R., Setiawan, D. and Sihombing, T.

Flood Risk Assessment of Heritage Building in Semarang City.

DOI: 10.5220/0010748000003113

In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Emerging Issues in Technology, Engineering and Science (ICE-TES 2021), pages 200-205

ISBN: 978-989-758-601-9

long-term plans that need to collaborate with the

government and many parties (Susanti et al., 2018).

From previous studies, community-based flood

disaster mitigation is one of the effective methods in

Semarang. This study aims to assess the risk of

flooding through the development of a flood risk

assessment instrument in a case study of cultural

heritage buildings, particularly Buddhist temple

heritage buildings in Semarang. It is hoped that from

the results of this study, a community-based flood risk

assessment instrument can be developed, so that flood

disaster resilience in Semarang is strengthened and

cultural heritage buildings can be well conserved.

2 METHODS

The method of assessing flood risk in this study was

developed from several previous studies. Participants

in the development of risk models and data on case

studies conducted in this study.

2.1 Flood Risk Assessment

Risk assessment instruments are based on the crunch

model that has been used in the disaster assessment

instruments issued by the Indonesia’s National

Disaster Management Agency (BNPB). Risk

components consist of Hazard, Vulnerability, and

Capacity.

The flood hazard component is determined based

on the historical height of flood inundation that has

hit the area around the building base on Indonesia’s

National Disaster Management Agency (BNPB)

(BNPB, 2012). The vulnerability component consists

of several sub-components, consists of the distance of

the building to the river (Hazarika et al., 2018), the

area of the affected building, the building structure

material, the age of the building, the height of the

building from the road, the condition of the building

(maintenance), sustainability management (D’Ayala

et al., 2020; Rana & Routray, 2018). Meanwhile, the

capacity component is assessed based on flood

preparedness (BNPB, 2012). The criteria for each

component can be seen in the Table 1.

Table 1: Flood risk assessment instruments for cultural

heritage buildings.

Risk

Component

Risk

Parameter

Risk

Value

Risk

Score

Weight

(In Each

Component)

Hazard

Height of flood

100%

<0.76m 1 0.33

0.76-1.5m 2 0.67

>1.5m 3 1

Vulnerability

Distance to the river

14.29%

>3k

1 0.33

0.6-3k

2 0.67

<0.6k

3 1

Building area

14.29%

<200m

1 0.33

200-500m

2 0.67

>200m

3 1

Building frame material

14.29%

Concrete

1 0.33

Masonr

2 0.67

Timbe

3 1

Age of building

14.29%

<10

ears

1 0.33

10-30years

2 0.67

>30

ears

3 1

Height of base to road

14.29%

1 0.33

-1m to 1

2 0.67

<-1

3 1

Building condition

14.29%

Goo

1 0.33

Poo

2 0.67

Very Poo

3 1

Sustainability management

14.29%

Goo

1 0.33

Poo

2 0.67

Ver

Poo

3 1

Capacity

Preparedness

100%

Very Poo

1 0.33

Poo

2 0.67

Goo

3 1

From the risk score from the results of the field

assessment, the risk calculation is carried out using

the following Formula 1 (BNPB, 2012).

RHV(1C)=××−

(1)

Where R=risk score, H=hazard score, V=

vulnerability score, and C=capacity score.

Flood Risk Assessment of Heritage Building in Semarang City

201

From the risk value, the level category of risk is

determined based on the criteria shown in the Table 2.

Table 2: Risk category parameter.

Risk Score

Risk

Cate

<0.33 Low

0.33-0.67 Moderate

>0,67 High

2.2 Case Study

The risk assessment of cultural heritage buildings was

carried out at 6 temples located in Semarang, namely

Tay Kak Sie Temple, Tek Hay Bio Temple, Siu Hok

Bio Temple, Hwie Wie Kiong Temple, Seh Hoh

Kiong Temple, Sam Po Kong Temple. The locations

of these 6 buildings are scattered on the riverbank in

the city of Semarang, shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2.

1a) Tay Kak Sie Temple. (1b) Tek Hay Bio Temple.

(1c) Siu Hok Bio Temple. (1d) Hwie Wie Kiong Temple

(1e) Seh Hoh Kiong Temple. (1f) Sam Po Kong Temple.

Figure 1: Temple heritage buildings.

Figure 2: Location of case study in Semarang City.

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Following are the results of the risk component

survey in the field shown in the Table 3. The results

of the score assessment and risk category are shown

in the Table 4. From the results of the risk assessment

carried out, a risk map can be described as shown in

Figure 3. The resulting risk map is a contribution to

disaster risk management, both in the prevention,

mitigation, preparedness, recovery, and lessons

learned phases (Rimba et al., 2017).

It can be seen from the flood risk map that these

six temples are located in the river area, but the

resulting risk assessment has various values. The

most influencing factor is the capacity for flood

disaster preparedness. From the 6 temples surveyed,

Tek Hay Bio Temple and Sam Po Kong Temple have

flood preparedness, where the aspect that is reviewed

is the aspect of preparedness from the aspects of

operation and maintenance.

In fulfilling the operational and maintenance

aspects, Sam Po Kong Temple is equipped with a

financial model in the form of a tourist attraction as

shown in Figure 4. The existence of a financial model

placing cultural heritage buildings into cultural

heritage gives them more ability to face the risk of

flood impacts. It appears that the building has been

upgraded and maintained. Meanwhile, at the Tek Hay

Bio Temple, preparedness is shown by the presence

of a fairly solid Buddhist community in the temple, so

that preparedness in the financial aspect comes from

the community of the people. In the other 4 temples,

the financial aspect for disaster preparedness is still

relatively limited, considering the limited financial

model unlike the other 2 temples.

ICE-TES 2021 - International Conference on Emerging Issues in Technology, Engineering, and Science

202

Table 3: Case Studies Data.

Risk

Component

Hazard Vulnerability Capacity

H V

Heritage

Temple

Building

Height

of Flood

(m)

Distance to

the river

(m)

Buildin

g Area

)

Building

Frame

Material

Age of

Building

(year)

Height of

Base from

road

(

)

Building

Condition

Sustainability

Management

Preventio

n Action

Tay Kak Sie

Tem

0.10 46.94 1850 Timber 260 0.5 Good Good Good

Tek Hay Bio

Temple

1.00 45.78 649 Concrete 264 1 Good Good Excellent

Siu Hok Bio

Tem

0.20 27.00 252 Masonry 267 0 Good Poor Poor

Hwie Wie

ion

Tem

0.00 58.53 1794 Timber 220 0.5 Good Poor Good

Seh Hoh

Kion

Tem

0.00 78.65 3453 Timber 139 1 Poor Poor Good

Sam Po Kong

Tem

1.00 398.00 32200 Concrete 296 3 Excellent Excellent Excellent

Table 4: Results of flood risk assessment in cultural heritage buildings.

Risk

Component

Hazard Vulnerability

Capacity

Risk

Heritage

Temple

Building

H V

Weighted

Risk Value

RHV(1C)=××−

Risk

Category

Tay Kak Sie

Temple

0.33 1 1 1 1 0.33 1 1 0.713 0.67 0.427

Moderate

Risk

Tek Hay Bio

Temple

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.713 1 0

Low Risk

Siu Hok Bio

Temple

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.714 0.33 0.541

Moderate

Risk

Hwie Wie

Kiong Temple

1 1 1 1 1 0.33 1 1 0.857 0.67 0.454

Moderate

Risk

Seh Hoh Kiong

Temple

0.33 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.857 0.67 0.454

Moderate

Risk

Sam Po Kong

Temple

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.617 1 0

Low Risk

Figure 3: Flood risk map on temple heritage buildings in the Semarang city.

Flood Risk Assessment of Heritage Building in Semarang City

203

Figure 4: Tourism in Sam Po Kong as Financial Model.

The discovery of sustainability issues related to

finance in cultural heritage buildings is relevant to

previous studies, where financial models have also

been developed related to the sustainability of cultural

preservation buildings (Guide, 2021; Jelinčić & Šveb,

2021; Pålsson Skarin, 2011).

In this study, there are several limitations,

including the limited access to historical data

obtained from interviews with temple administrators

which were validated with several secondary sources.

Primary data sources as historical evidence of

inundation height, the exact age of the building

cannot be found with certainty.

However, from the instruments and results of field

surveys conducted, the instruments developed by

elaborating on several previously developed

instruments can provide findings related to the

importance of financial sustainability in flood disaster

mitigation efforts in cultural heritage buildings.

4 CONCLUSIONS

The findings in this study indicate that the risk of

flooding can be reduced by increasing the capacity in

the aspect of financial sustainability.

The assessment instrument developed by

elaborating several instruments in this study can

provide a finding in a case study of cultural heritage

buildings in the city of Semarang.

With the risk mapping carried out in this study, it

can help stakeholders involved in the conservation of

cultural heritage buildings in formulating strategies

and determining policies related to flood disaster

resilience in cultural heritage.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Data for this paper were based on the “Reconstruction

Project: Study of Heritage Temple in North Coast of

Java for Vihara Satya Budhi Reconstruction” funded

by Vihara Satya Budhi Temple Foundation, Bandung,

West Java, Indonesia. The project was led by

Dr.Sugiri Kustedja and Dr.Cindrawaty Lesmana.

The author is grateful for the anonymous

reviewer’s helpful comments and suggestions as well

as the research team’s feedback.

REFERENCES

BNPB. (2012). Peraturan Badan Nasional

Penanggulangan Bencana No 02 Tahun 2012 Tentang

Pedoman Umum Pengkajian Risiko Bencana. 67.

D’Ayala, Di., Wang, K., Yan, Y., Smith, H., Massam, A.,

Filipova, V., & Jacqueline Pereira, J. (2020). Flood

vulnerability and risk assessment of urban traditional

buildings in a heritage district of Kuala Lumpur,

Malaysia. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences,

20(8), 2221–2241. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-

2221-2020

Guide, P. (2021). Cultural Heritage and Displacement.

Language Issues in Comparative Education II, 163–

188. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004449671_008

Hai, V. M., & Smyth, I. (2012). The Disaster Crunch

Model : Guidelines for a Gendered Approach. 1–16.

Handayani, W., Chigbu, U. E., Rudiarto, I., & Surya Putri,

I. H. (2020). Urbanization and increasing flood risk in

the Northern Coast of Central Java-Indonesia: An

assessment towards better land use policy and flood

management. Land, 9(10).

https://doi.org/10.3390/LAND9100343

Handayani, W., Hapsari, S. P. I., Mega, A., & Sih, S. J.

(2019). Community-based disaster management:

Assessing local preparedness groups (LPGs) to build a

resilient community in Semarang City, Indonesia.

Disaster Advances, 12(5), 23–36.

Hazarika, N., Barman, D., Das, A. K., Sarma, A. K., &

Borah, S. B. (2018). Assessing and mapping flood

hazard, vulnerability and risk in the Upper Brahmaputra

River valley using stakeholders’ knowledge and

multicriteria evaluation (MCE). Journal of Flood Risk

Management, 11, S700–S716.

https://doi.org/10.1111/jfr3.12237

Jelinčić, D. A., & Šveb, M. (2021). Financial Sustainability

of Cultural Heritage: A Review of Crowdfunding in

Europe. Journal of Risk and Financial Management,

14(3), 101. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm14030101

Miladan, N. (2016). Communities’ Contributions to Urban

Resilience Process: a Case Study of Semarang City

(Indonesia) Toward Coastal Hydrological Risk.

Architecture, Space Management. Université Paris-Est.

http://www.theses.fr/2016PESC1010.pdf

ICE-TES 2021 - International Conference on Emerging Issues in Technology, Engineering, and Science

204

Pålsson Skarin, I. (2011). A Finance Model for the Built

Cultural Heritage – Proposals for improvements of

future heritage economics. http://portal.research.

lu.se/portal/en/publications/a-finance-model-for-the-

built-cultural-heritage--proposals-for-improvements-

of-future-heritage-economics(76c3efea-618d-4afc-

9b68-17e8c2943150).html

Rana, I. A., & Routray, J. K. (2018). Integrated

methodology for flood risk assessment and application

in urban communities of Pakistan. Natural Hazards,

91(1), 239–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-017-

3124-8

Rimba, A., Setiawati, M., Sambah, A., & Miura, F. (2017).

Physical Flood Vulnerability Mapping Applying

Geospatial Techniques in Okazaki City, Aichi

Prefecture, Japan. Urban Science, 1(1), 7.

https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci1010007

Stephenson, V., & D’Ayala, D. (2014). A new approach to

flood vulnerability assessment for historic buildings in

England. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences,

14(5), 1035–1048. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-14-

1035-2014

Susanti, B. T., Dewi, D. Y. T. N., & Sunarimahingsih, I. Y.

T. (2018). Developing a Disaster Risk Reduction

Strategy for Semarang Old Town. 56.

Twigg, J. (2015). Disaster Risk Reduction. In Overseas

Development Institute. Overseas Development Institute.

https://doi.org/10.4337/9781782548232.00014

Wang, J. (2014). Flood risk maps to cultural heritage :

Measures and process. Journal of Cultural Heritage.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2014.03.002

APPENDIX

Risk Assessment Survey Form

No. Heritage Building Risk Assessment

1 Buildin

Location

City:

Coordinate:

Latitude

Lon

itude

3 Building Function:

4 Area of Building (m

5 Hei

ht of Buildin

6 Building Structure Material:

Building Visitor:

Slack conditions:

Moderate conditions

Crowded conditions:

8 Years Buildin

was founded:

9 History of renovation

Year Renovation Detail

Disaster History (Fire,

earthquake, flood, volcano,

tornado):

Year Disaster detail and impact

Notes

Plan Sketch

Flood Risk Assessment of Heritage Building in Semarang City

205