Publishers of Architecture, Art, and Design Gordon Goff: Publisher www.oroeditions.com info@oroeditions.com Published by ORO Editions Copyright © 2026 Sibarani Sofian. Published under license by ORO Editions. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including electronic, mechanical, photocopying or microfilming, recording, or otherwise (except that copying permitted by Sections 107 and 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law and exceptby reviewers for the public press) without written permission from the publisher. You must not circulate this book in any other binding or cover and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer.
Author: Sibarani Sofian Co-author: David Hutama Editors: Sibarani Sofian, Diana Zerlina, Billy Gerrardus Santo, Annissa Windahasanah, Gilang Pidianku, Imaniyah Sabita Graphic Design: SANROK Studio Photographer: Mario Wibowo Photography ORO Managing Editor: Jake Anderson 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 First Edition ISBN: 978-1-966515-59-3 Color Separations and Printing: ORO Editions, Inc. Printed in China. International Distribution: www.oroeditions.com/distribution ORO Editions makes a continuous effort to minimize the overall carbon footprint of its publications. As part of this goal, ORO Editions, in association with Global ReLeaf, arranges to plant trees to replace those used in the manufacturing of the paper produced for its books. Global ReLeaf is an international campaign run by American Forests, one of the world’s oldest nonprofit conservation organizations. Global ReLeaf is American Forests’ education and action program that helps individuals, organizations, agencies, and corporations improve the local and global environment by planting and caring for trees.
Foreword
6
Chapter 4
Preface
10
On the Field
Table of Terminology
14
210
From Designer to Advisory
211
Driving Implementation from Plan Development
214
Managing Performance Through Urban
220
Design and Modeling Tools Introduction A Capital City as a New Design Conversation
16
Growing Pain
230
Design Intent and Market Expectation
232
Interview with Diana Kusumastuti
234
Looking Back, Moving Forward
236
Chapter 1 Staging the Center
20
Chapter 2 The Competition That Forged a Vision
34
The Moment of Entry: The Competition
34
The Scheme of Nagara Rimba Nusa
46
Pancasila and the Four Pillars
50
Forest First, City Later
54
Four Transformations of IKN
64
The Presidential Palace
67
One Winner, Multiple Interpretations
70
Interview with Imam S. Ernawi
72
Chapter 3 Forging a New Heart
74
Developing Nagara Rimba Nusa
74
Transition from Competition
78
to Collaboration Team The Three Pillars of Nusantara
82
The Key Performance Indicators
84
A Second Beginning
86
Design Approaches of Nusantara
88
Working with Contour
88
Nature-Inspired Approach
90
Urban Form of Nusantara: An Archipelago
94
of Polycentric-Oriented City The Five Cultural Transformations
108
Transformation in Nature Preservation
110
Transformation in Nationalism
116
Transformation in Mobility
170
Transformation in Working
178
Transformation in Living
184
A Capital Rooted in Land and Culture
190
References
256
URBAN+ Profile
260
Contributors
262
Foreword
Designing Nusantara:
Foreword During the past century many new towns have been self-consciously designed and built around the world. They were purposefully established to meet demographic, economic, and/ or political ends. Most resulted from government policies that seek to redistribute populations to areas where they are scant or, alternatively, to reduce the pressures on the fraying infrastructure of existing cities. Several of these new towns have been the state or provincial capitals of countries. Of greater inspiration have been a handful of national capitals. They continue to be built as political aspirations evolve. National capital cities created by fiat have a long history. Those recently designed vary considerably in grandeur and in the degree to which their designs have captured international attention. Large or small, one of the purposes of their designs has been to act as a unifying symbol that promotes a country’s self image and celebrates its people’s aspirations. The spatial arrangement and architectural design of their legislative, judicial, and administrative buildings; presidential quarters; and leading institutions have been the focus of special attention. The organization of these elements forms the basis of the image that people, both citizens and internationally, have of the city and the nation. The designs that are noticed are bold in character and follow a clear architectural paradigm. Their designs are also associated with individual patrons and architects. The early twenty-first-century design of Nur-Sultan (formerly Astana) was guided by Kisho Kurokawa with autocratic President Nursultan Nazarbayev as its client. Its hypermodern buildings, monuments, and large, open spaces were designed to impress. They symbolize Kazakhstan’s heritage and its pride in being independent and modern. In seeking to impress as an object to admire, the urban design of the city shows scant concern for the extreme continental climate or the natural characteristics of its geographic location. Those schemes that follow a unified design paradigm demonstrate the strengths of the functions that it addresses but possess weaknesses where important functions have been neglected. The City Beautiful design paradigm was regarded as the design paradigm for new capital cities at the beginning of the twentieth century. The Rationalist paradigm, as promulgated and aggressively promoted by progressive utopian Europeans and their acolytes, challenged it. The Pilot plan of Brasília, the work of Lucio Costa, with the buildings designed by
6
by Jon Lang
Nusantara’s design shows urban designers how to address conflicting needs while producing a highly imageable design. It demonstrates how to exploit to advantage the characteristics of site and climate.
The Making of Indonesia’s New Capital
Oscar Niemeyer is arguably the exemplar of pure modernist thought. Chandigarh’s capital complex, the work of Le Corbusier, provides Indians with a sense of pride in architecturally breaking from the shackles of the past. Its design, however, little reflects its geographical or cultural context. It celebrates its architect more than the two Indian states that it serves as a capital. Recent national capital city plans that owe a debt to modernist thinking include Ciudad de la Paz now being constructed in Equatorial Guinea. It was designed by FAT (Future Architectural Thinking Lisboa) led by Bernardo Quinzaños. Less honored, it lacks the boldness of the modernists’ oeuvre but strives to consider its tropical forested surroundings. The 2014 design of Amaravati, the new capital of the Indian state of Andra Pradesh, by Foster + Partners seeks to be a solution that recognizes the Indian context. What can we learn from the existing purposefully designed capital cities on greenfield sites and the paradigms on which they are based? Firstly, their designs have proven to be satisficing solutions to the roles they seek to fulfill. They are good enough. Even when they are not well loved, they are admired and, more importantly, they establish a sense of pride in the hearts of their citizens. Secondly, however, each has incurred opportunity costs. There is a sense that something is missing in their souls. They could have been located anywhere. They fail to take full advantage of their geographic and cultural contexts. In addition, although neatly configured, they lack the liveliness of laissez-faire evolving cities. The strict segregation of their instrumental functions into distinct quarters is a mistake. They could have had richer designs. Individual planning and architectural decisions made following market forces have remediated some of the shortcomings of the planned new capital cities. The feeling that they could have been designed differently from the outset, nevertheless, remains. Their success in fulfilling their symbolic function has been important, but they have proven to not be functional enough on many unconsidered dimensions. In searching for grandeur and purity of design many of their potential functions were ignored. The competition for the design of Nusantara provided urban designers with the opportunity to reconsider how to approach a design task. The winning design did. Still in the early phases of its development the city is already attracting Indonesian visitors.
They take pride in its symbolic qualities, but they also appreciate what it offers as a setting for an enjoyable everyday life while taking its geographical environment into account. It functions well.
Functionality The comprehensiveness of the brief, or program, for a project determines much about the quality of its design. The brief establishes the general goals and specific objectives— the functions—that a design is to serve. In most briefs, the functions required of a project are narrowly defined. They focus on identifying the instrumental purposes it is to serve. Other functions are ignored. They were not ignored in the brief for what has turned out to be Nusantara. Many concerns were, nevertheless, left for those submitting an entry to the competition for its design to define and to synthesize into a unified whole. Much in a program is, purposefully or unself-consciously, changed as a specific urban and architectural design emerges from discussions over ends and means. Conflicting ends need to be reconciled and concerns not identified in the brief need to be addressed. All designs, whether for a bicycle shed or a cathedral, carry meanings. The purposeful creation of these meanings— through the manipulation of the visual and, although seldom clearly articulated, sonic, tactile, and olfactory qualities of the built environment—often overrides the other basic function that a scheme can serve. In the design of capital cities, it is the meanings associated with their three-dimensional geometric patterns that often override the meeting of other requirements. The basic operational functions of a city such as the efficient and comfortable accommodation of its instrumental and secondary activities are poorly afforded. In addition, acknowledging the city’s geographic setting is neglected. Cities need to be enjoyable places to be as well as visions to contemplate. The symbolic qualities of a city’s architecture and open spaces establish its place in the minds and hearts of its inhabitants. The spacing of buildings and the organization of a city’s streets, squares, and parks and the ways they are landscaped and planted need to reflect their geographic and cultural context if they are to function well. The latitude
7
Foreword
and climatic and topographic context of a design determine what is possible and what can be celebrated. It remains the designers’ responsibility to identify what is possible and to organize the open spaces within a proposal so that they enhance a city’s quality as a living organism, as a place to admire and as a place to inhabit. The complexities of the proposed site of Indonesia’s new capital in Kalimantan challenged architects’ thoughts but also gave them the opportunity to think anew about how to create a design that simultaneously captures the imagination while both respecting and exploiting its geographical and cultural context. In building on and enriching the competition’s design brief, Sibarani Sofian and URBAN+ have done that. Their broadness of concern, sensitivity to the context, and thought processes are exemplified in the design of Nusantara’s core. The geometric nature of the governmental complex of a new capital city is integral to the overall image it creates in the world’s mind. It is the grand, central idea of its configuration that is important to the mainstream of the international cognoscenti—the architectural experts. While the organizing idea is indeed central to a capital city’s success, the limitations of this level of analysis have become abundantly clear. Many such designs lack both the variety of settings that enrich the lives of their diverse inhabitants and fail to promote the health of their biogenic settings. The jurors of the design competition for Nusantara recognized this reality. The winning design, as demonstrated in this book, matches the requirement for a city to have a strong image while meeting the needs of its future inhabitants and visitors while simultaneously considering the quality of the natural world of which it is a fully functioning part.
Clients and Patrons Several capital city designs have resulted from design competitions. The quality of the winning design selected depends on the attitudes—knowledge and values—of the members of the selecting jury. Their understanding of the brief acts as the basis for their evaluation of the schemes they are reviewing. They must predict how a design that is portrayed in drawings or in three-dimensional model form will perform when implemented. In carrying out their
8
Designing Nusantara:
task, they act, implicitly at least, on behalf of a broad set of clients and, often, a patron. Their decision also affects, whether considered or not, the multiplier and side effects of a proposed scheme. All settlements are inhabited by diverse populations with a variety of aspirations. How do planners cater for this range of ways of life in designing a city for the future? Few capital city designs have involved potential inhabitants’ views in taking the competition’s requirements forward. Almost all have resulted from a strictly top–down design process. All the decisions about the ways of life of its future inhabitants are based on the assumptions of designers involved. The winning scheme for Nusantara is different. It was partially based on the advice of diverse stakeholders. It was also much influenced by the character and location of its site. The criterion, or set of criteria, for the precise selection of capital city sites have been diverse and politically charged. Every location has its own ecological nature. How does one deal with the characteristics of a greenfield site? In most cases a design idea has been arbitrarily imposed on its site. Societal values have changed. Today much attention needs to be paid to the natural characteristics of a site. The site becomes a silent client whose health needs to be considered. The tropical nature of the climate, vegetation, and the undulating, indeed rugged, site of Nusantara posed considerable challenges to all those who entered the competition for its design. The competition winning layout and architecture of Nusantara provides many lessons for urban designers on how to address the specific characteristics of a site. Those characteristics clearly informed its design as the story told in this book reveals. How well will Nusantara’s original design stand up to the buffeting that it will receive from various interest groups as it is developed? Some capital city designs have been guarded over and shielded from competing interests by individuals who act as their patrons. They ensure that steady progress is made on the formulation and implantation of a proposal. Some patrons have been political dictators; others have been politicians, military leaders, and civil servants. In each case they hold the power to amalgamate resources, financial and political, to get a scheme implemented. In the nineteenth century, Napolean III gave Baron Georges-Eugėne Haussmann a free hand in redeveloping
The Making of Indonesia’s New Capital
central Paris. Juscelino Kubitscheck, president of Brazil from 1956 to 1961, was the force driving the building of Brasília. Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s first prime minister, was Le Corbusier’s guardian angel when he was designing Chandigarh’s capital complex. President Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo is the patron of Ciudad de la Paz. India’s current prime minister, Narendra Modi, is the figure driving the redevelopment of the central, axial design of New Delhi that India inherited from the British Government of India. His goal is to shed the colonial legacy; its architect’s objective is to do so while retaining the essence of what the City Beautiful paradigm affords well, including grand parades. When the driving force behind a scheme no longer holds controlling power, what happens to a project? Joko Widodo, Indonesia’s president for a decade from 2014, has been the patron of Nusantara, although the idea of a new capital city design process was guided by the Ministry of National Development Planning. How does one design to ensure that a proposal is implemented when the power elite changes? It takes a long time for a scheme to evolve and its components to be implemented. Designs must be robust. They need to maintain their integrity despite changes being made to them as circumstances change. Nusantara’s design is, indeed, resilient. It is based on a deep analysis and understanding of its context. Its logic is clear and consistent.
locale. The increased frequency of events such as cyclones, the warming of the climate, rising sea levels, and problems with dealing with groundwater have demonstrated the fragility of our planet. In addition, the loss of a sense of place in an increasingly globalizing world challenges designers’ abilities to reconcile international and local perspectives in a design. Nusantara’s design by Sibarani Sofian and URBAN+ responds to the necessity of creating a multifunctional city. Capital city designs today seemingly must respond to global views of what it means to be modern—that is, up to date—while reinforcing a specific nation’s view of itself. The universal hypermodern, futuristic, geometrically exciting architecture as a symbol of the modern world does not have to be the design paradigm to follow. Designing with the climatic and ecological context of a location in mind while respecting local traditions and values can be the basis for creating a design that acts as a symbol of a country’s aspirations and establishes a sense of pride in the hearts of its citizens. If Argentina, Iran, or South Sudan ever proceed with their plans to build new capitals, they need to thoroughly examine the variables considered and procedures followed in the design of Nusantara. Nusantara’s design shows urban designers how to address conflicting needs while producing a highly imageable design. It demonstrates how Observations to exploit to advantage the characteristics of site and climate. In this case it was a tricky, hilly terrain and the building Much conventional new city design is based on the para- spacing requirements of a tropical setting. In designing digms favored by the cognoscenti. Most of these paradigms for the future, Nusantara’s design illuminates the power were thoughtfully created by architects and scholars for of the idealist thinking of the rationalists while drawing on what they imagined to be the good ways of life of peo- the growing body of empirical knowledge that the design ple living in temperate climates. They also assumed, if fields possess. The approach to Nusantara’s design pronot a flat site, one that is only gently sloping. In seeking vides urban designers and architects with a procedural bold designs architects have paid scant attention to the rather than a geometric paradigm for the future. qualities of locales. The bold architectural idea takes precedence. Can it not be possible, however, to bear the climate and nature of a place in mind while producing a visually Jon Lang captivating scheme? The design of Nusantara is informed by existing urban design paradigms and by an understanding of the successes Emeritus Professor, and limitations of past fiat capital city designs. It is not, University of New South Wales however, shaped by them. Today we are acutely aware of the negative impact of disregarding the natural character of a
9
Preface
Designing Nusantara:
Preface by Sibarani Sofian In November 2025, I presented the planning and design of Indonesia’s new capital city, Nusantara, at the Holcim Foundation Forum in Venice. The forum brought together a carefully curated community of urban thinkers, environmental scientists, policymakers, and design practitioners to address one of today’s defining climate challenges: flooding. The discussion centered on the concept of radical retreat and how cities must rethink their relationship with land, water, and risk in an era of accelerating climate uncertainty. Within this global conversation, Nusantara was not presented as a finished city, nor as an idealized solution, but as a contemporary experiment: a capital planned in direct response to climate imperatives, shaped by ecological constraints, and informed by cultural intelligence. What struck me most was the response. Nusantara was received not simply as an ambitious national project, but as one of the most advanced capital city plans currently underway. It is recognized for its high sustainability targets, its technological rigor, and, perhaps most importantly, its rootedness in local wisdom. Several participants noted that what distinguished Nusantara was its inward-looking approach: drawing from existing landscapes, cosmological spatial traditions, and long-standing relationships between human, nature, and the sacred, rather than defaulting to imported or generic ‘western’ solutions. That moment of reflection in Venice became the awakening moment for this book. This book was written from within a planning process that unfolded over five years, those years marked by urgency, uncertainty, responsibility, and continuous iteration. When I first became involved in the design of Indonesia’s new capital in 2019, it never crossed my mind that the work would extend into realization, grappling with questions of land, governance, culture, and implementation at a national scale, nor that it would lead me to write this book. What began as a design competition evolved into a long and demanding journey of translating vision into reality, and of learning, repeatedly, what it truly means to design a city from scratch. Designing a capital city is unlike any other professional undertaking. It is not merely a matter of form, infrastructure, or aesthetics. A capital embodies the aspirations, anxieties, and contradictions of a nation at a particular moment in its history. Every line drawn, every axis proposed, every
10
What I aim to share is a way of seeing the capital city, which, often imagined as total designs, are in fact negotiated territories.
The Making of Indonesia’s New Capital
landscape preserved or transformed carries symbolic, political, ecological, and social consequences. From the outset, it was clear that Nusantara would not only be judged by its appearance, but by the values it chose to represent and the responsibilities it assumed, both nationally and globally. The early months of the project were defined by imagination and conviction. The competition phase allowed space for bold ideas, speculation, and synthesis. Nagara Rimba Nusa emerged from a belief that Indonesia’s new capital must not repeat inherited urban paradigms: neither the unpreparedness and reversed logic that shaped Jakarta, nor the generic rhetoric of global “green, smart, and livable cities.” Instead, it proposed a capital shaped by forest ecologies, cultural identity, and contemporary urbanism. At that moment, the work felt clear and light, driven by ideals and collective enthusiasm. That sense of clarity did not last long. The formative years of Nusantara unfolded almost entirely under the shadow of a global pandemic. From March 2020 through much of 2023, the work took place amid profound disruption. Offices closed, travel halted, and uncertainty became the dominant condition. Meetings that would normally unfold around drawings and physical models shifted to screens. Urban design, so reliant on collaboration, dialogue, and iterative exchange, was forced to adapt to isolation. Yet paradoxically, the pandemic clarified the deeper relevance of the project. Questions of resilience, proximity, access to green space, self-sufficiency, and reduced dependence on private vehicles were no longer abstract planning principles; they became lived realities. Amid constraint, the pandemic also created an unusual condition of focus. It allowed time to reflect on foundational ideas and to test concepts with restraint. The ideas of compact living embedded in Nusantara, including ten-minute access, ecological buffers, and integrated mobility, resonated strongly with this collective experience. Designing a capital during a global health crisis sharpened our awareness that cities must be capable of absorbing shocks, not merely projecting ideals. That the project moved forward at all during this period required persistence, institutional commitment, and shared belief in the long-term vision. Looking back, these years formed a crucible that tested not only the endurance
of the ideas, but also the discipline of the process and the resolve of the people involved. That Nusantara progressed from concept toward realization through this period remains one of the most humbling aspects of the journey. As the project moved beyond competition and into national implementation, the role of design shifted fundamentally. The question was no longer what Nusantara could be, but what it could realistically become within institutional structures, regulatory frameworks, market pressures, technical constraints, and political timelines. Design expanded from authorship to stewardship. Decisions were no longer made in isolation, but through continuous dialogue with ministries, engineers, environmental scientists, economists, security advisors, and local stakeholders. Each layer added complexity, and each required compromise without surrendering the core intent. Over time, I came to understand that designing Nusantara was not a linear process, but a continuous act of translation. Ideas had to be translated into policies; policies into guidelines; and guidelines into parcels, infrastructure corridors, and building envelopes. Concepts coherent at the master-plan scale often encountered resistance at the level of soil condition, hydrology, implementation expectations, or investment feasibility. Progress was incremental and, at times, fragile, punctuated by moments of doubt intensified by shifting institutional directions and bureaucratic complexity. What sustained the work was a growing recognition that urban design at this scale is less about control than about alignment. The land itself became an active collaborator. Contours, rivers, soil conditions, and forest remnants continuously redirected decisions. Rather than imposing a singular geometry, the design learned to listen—to allow ridges to guide movement, valleys to structure ecological corridors, and forests to define urban limits. In this sense, Nusantara became an exercise in humility as much as ambition. Equally important was the conviction that urban form could serve as a vessel for civilizational intention. Indonesia’s new capital was never conceived merely as an administrative center, but as a spatial expression of Indonesia Maju, an aspiration toward a more equitable, resilient, and forward-looking society. I felt a persistent responsibility
11
Preface
to push the conversation beyond the design of a governmental enclave, toward a new urban paradigm. Designing from scratch offered a rare opportunity to confront structural issues embedded in existing Indonesian cities, such as sprawl, car dependency, environmental degradation, and social fragmentation, and to deliberately avoid repeating them. The ambition was not utopian, but disciplined: to test how far contemporary knowledge, technology, and cultural intelligence could enable a leap forward. This ambition unfolded within a global context shaped by the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 21), and subsequent climate agendas. Nusantara adopted some of the most ambitious sustainability targets ever set for a capital city: net-zero emissions, 100 percent renewable energy, a dominant public transport mode share, high-waste recycling rates, measurable urban cooling, compact ten-minute neighborhoods, and extensive ecological restoration. These were not rhetorical commitments; they demanded spatial consequences. My task as an urban designer was to translate these metrics into urban form, including street networks, densities, land-use mixes, landscape systems, and mobility structures, while keeping the city legible, livable, and culturally grounded. The question was no longer how Nusantara should look, but how its spatial structure could actively enable these outcomes. What kind of morphology reduces energy demand and efficiency over land rather than suburban solution? How can proximity and connectivity make mobility shifts plausible? How can ecological systems function as green infrastructure rather than residual space? And how can all of this remain legible within an Indonesian cultural framework? This pushed the project toward what I understand as performance-based urbanism. Design was evaluated not only by form or function, but by measurable outcomes, including carbon intensity, mobility behavior, microclimate performance, ecological continuity, and long-term adaptability. Advancements in spatial analytics, parametric modeling, and digital simulation tools enabled iterative testing and refinement in ways unimaginable in earlier generations of capital city planning. Technology did not replace judgment or intuition but augmented them by translating ambition into measurable spatial strategies.
12
Designing Nusantara:
Throughout these five years, my own position evolved. I was no longer only a designer proposing ideas, but a mediator navigating competing priorities. There were times when defending the original intent of Nagara Rimba Nusa required firmness, and times when letting go was necessary to allow the project to move forward. Learning when to insist and when to adapt became one of the most difficult aspects of the work. In that tension, I came to see urban design not as a product, but as a process and practice of judgment. This conviction was shaped by a longer personal journey. I graduated from the Department of Architecture at Institut Teknologi Bandung in 1997 amid Indonesia’s financial crisis. In 1999 I completed a Master of Urban Development and Design at the University of New South Wales under the tutorship of Prof. Jon T. Lang and Prof. James Weirick, which laid foundation for my urban design and planning skills. Nearly twelve years of professional practice across Singapore, Hong Kong, China, and Southeast Asia exposed me to large-scale urban development, including early work of Putrajaya, one of the few purpose-built capitals of recent decades. My return to Indonesia in 2011 coincided with renewed national confidence. When the opportunity to participate in Nusantara emerged in 2019, these strands of experience converged. This book does not claim authorship over Nusantara, nor present the city as a finished achievement. Nusantara is, and will remain, a collective project shaped by many hands and decisions beyond any single designer’s control. Rather than offering a singular narrative of success, it documents uncertainty, revision, and negotiation. What I aim to share is a way of seeing the capital city, which, often imagined as total designs, are in fact negotiated territories. I write this preface aware that proximity brings bias, but also responsibility. If there is one conviction that has strengthened over these years, it is this: cities are not built through plans alone, but through values sustained over time. Design can initiate that trajectory, but it cannot complete it alone. The work documented in this book was made possible through the contribution of many individuals and institutions. I am particularly grateful to the leadership
The Making of Indonesia’s New Capital
Designing a capital city is unlike any other professional undertaking. It is not merely a matter of form, infrastructure, or aesthetics.
and teamwork within the Ministry of Public Works and Housing of Indonesia (Kementerian PUPR), especially Ir. Imam Santoso Ernawi, MCM, M.Sc., for leading the collaborative planning and coordinating through the construction process beyond its initial vision within 3.5 years, and to the Nusantara Capital City Authority (OIKN) for continuing its implementation. I also acknowledge the URBAN+ design team, who is the backbone of the IKN works, and the wider professional and academic community who translated ambition into reality. I give thanks to God for the strength that sustained me, and to my wife, Sylvia Wiradarma, and my daughters, Angeline and Aimeeline Suriadi, for their patience and quiet support throughout this journey, as well as to my late father, Sofian Suriadi, and my mother, Swandari, whose values and guidance shaped who I am today. Nusantara is still becoming. This book records one chapter of that becoming, from the inside, with all its conviction, hesitation, and care.
Sibarani Sofian URBAN+ Founder
A capital embodies the aspirations, anxieties, and contradictions of a nation at a particular moment in its history.
13
Table of Terminology
Designing Nusantara:
Table of Terminology
Abbreviation
In Bahasa Indonesia
In English
ATR
Kementerian Agraria dan Tata Ruang
Ministry of Agrarian Affairs and Spatial Planning
Bappenas
Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional / Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional
Ministry of National Development Planning
DPD
Dewan Perwakilan Daerah
Regional Representative Council
DPR
Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat
House of Representatives
GBCI
—
Green Building Council Indonesia
ITS
—
Intelligent Transportation System
Ibu Kota Nusantara
Nusantara Capital City
Nama resmi Ibu Kota Negara per 15 Februari 2022
The Official Name of New Capital City of Indonesia since February 15, 2022
K-IKN
Kawasan Ibu Kota Negara
Urban Area of IKN
KIPP
Kawasan Inti Pusat Pemerintahan
Government Core Area
KP-IKN
Kawasan Pengembangan-Ibu Kota Negara
Development Area of IKN
KY
Komisi Yudisial
Judicial Commission
MA
Mahkamah Agung
Supreme Court
MK
Mahkamah Konstitusi
Constitutional Court
MPR
Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat
People’s Consultative Assembly
OIKN
Otorita Ibu Kota Nusantara
Nusantara Capital City Authority
PUPR
Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
The Ministry of Public Works and Public Housing
IKN
14
The Making of Indonesia’s New Capital
Abbreviation
In Bahasa Indonesia
In English
RIT
Rencana Infrastruktur Terintegrasi
Integrated Infrastructure Plan
RPK
Rencana Pengembangan Kawasan
Comprehensive Urban Design Guidelines
SPALD-T
Sistem Pengolahan Air Limbah Domestik Terpusat
Centralized Domestic Wastewater System
Sub-Sub-WP
Sub-Sub-Wilayah Perencanaan
Precinct
Sub-WP
Sub-Wilayah Perencanaan
Sub-Planning Area
UDD
—
Urban Design Development
UNA
—
Urban Network Analysis
WP
Wilayah Perencanaan
Planning Area
WTE
—
Waste to Energy
WTP
—
Water Treatment Plant
Terms in Bahasa Indonesia
Terms in English
Blok
District
Sub-Blok
Urban Block
Persil
Parcel
15
Introduction: A Capital City as a New Design Conversation
Introduction
Designing Nusantara:
A Capital City as a New Design Conversation
On August 16, 2019, President Joko Widodo announced that Indonesia would relocate its capital to East Kalimantan. This decision did more than initiate a city-building project—it sparked something deeper in how we imagine a better built-environment. The relocation effort is not simply administrative. It is conceptual. It turns the act of city-building into a national project of meaning-making. The subsequent design competition drew more than 700 entries, signaling an extraordinary level of engagement from the design community.
16
The Making of Indonesia’s New Capital
The city has always been a site of complexity. Cities change like rivers—sometimes slow and meandering, other times sudden and sweeping. But they always move through many channels at once. The rhizome, a conceptual structure described by Deleuze and Guattari (1987), helps explain this condition. A rhizome spreads horizontally, has no singular center, and grows through constant connection. Cities operate in a similar way. They are not built from a single idea but from many. Urban design emerges from this condition. It serves as a tool to interpret, guide, and negotiate the city’s layered realities. Urban design is often an act of holding contradictions in both hands. It negotiates between permanence and change, between order and openness. As such, Jon Lang (2017) emphasizes that urban design must adapt to shifting contexts and cannot be confined to a fixed disciplinary boundary. It is inherently multidisciplinary and operates across scales. These qualities become especially vital when applied to the making of a capital city. A capital city is unlike any other. It is not just a place for administration. It is a projection of national ideals. Throughout history, from Washington, DC, to Canberra, Brasília, and Chandigarh, capital cities have embodied political intent and cultural ambition. Spiro Kostof (1991), in The City Shaped, described capitals as performative spaces of statehood. Their geometry and spaces may look calm, but they speak volumes and echo ambition, identity, and memory.
17
Introduction: A Capital City as a New Design Conversation
Designing Nusantara:
“The nation’s capital is not only a symbol of the nation’s identity, but also a representation of the nation’s progress. This is for the realization of equity and economic justice. This is for the vision of Advanced Indonesia. Indonesia that lives forever.” State Address August 16, 2019
Nagara Rimba Nusa, the title of the winning design scheme for this capital city, builds on this lineage but offers a radical departure. The city doesn’t just sit on the forest like a blanket. It weaves through it. The landscape becomes the framework, not the backdrop. The design draws from ecological urbanism and landscape principles to propose a capital that aligns with environmental systems, cultural traditions, and technological standards. Such an ambitious vision invites scrutiny. Many questions remain about whether the relocation of the capital can live up to its transformative promise. There are concerns that the project, despite its sustainable branding, risks repeating the very patterns it seeks to overcome. Building a new city in one of the most biodiverse regions in the world could lead to ecological degradation rather than restoration. The notion of decentralization is also contested, suggesting that without institutional reform the move may result in symbolic displacement rather than genuine political redistribution. Most urgently, development on this scale risks marginalizing indigenous communities and erasing traditional land systems.
18
These concerns are, in fact, addressed in the Nagara Rimba Nusa scheme. In this proposal, the forest is not ornamental but structural. The city is shaped by biophilic principles, spatial equity, and climate resilience. Vernacular contexts are not sidelined but integrated as part of the design logic. The proposal follows the ten-minute-city framework, uses measurable sustainability indicators, and promotes coexistence between urban life and natural systems. These indicators are elaborated and discussed in detail in the following chapters. This book comes from a simple desire: to share the thinking behind a city that tries to do things differently. It seeks to offer a clear and systematic account of Nagara Rimba Nusa—from its conceptual beginnings to its design logic and its early implementation. But more than that, it aims to position the capital relocation as a critical moment in Indonesia’s urban history. The book is structured into four chapters. The first addresses the idea of centrality and reflects on the role of capital cities throughout time. The second discusses the master plan competition as a public design mechanism. The third chapter delves into
↑ Far from the drawing board: Arrival at the site of what would become the Government Core Area, 2020
the scheme development in depth, and the fourth chapter opens the space for reflection, tracking early implementation, field adjustments, and future questions. The goal of this book is to contribute to the discourse of urban design in Indonesia. It presents Nagara Rimba Nusa not as a finished product, but as a working document, a design framework still in motion. It recognizes the complexities, contradictions, and aspirations embedded in the making of a capital city. Through this publication, readers are invited to explore how urban design can serve not only to shape form but to negotiate meaning, advance equity, and imagine new modes of coexistence.
19
1/ Staging the Center
Chapter
1
Designing Nusantara:
Staging the Center
In 2019, the Government of Indonesia officially announced its plan to build a new capital city, IKN (Ibu Kota Negara). Set in the interior of East Kalimantan, this initiative responds to long-standing concerns about overconcentration in Jakarta, as well as more recent imperatives related to climate resilience, digital transformation, and inclusive governance.
20
Samarinda
IKN The new nation’s capital
Balikpapan
Jakarta The current capital of Indonesia
East Kalimantan
↑ Indonesia’s Capital City Relocation
As Prof. Jon Lang reminds us in the foreword, capital cities historically, is never merely a midpoint. It is the origin of are never merely functional relocations; they are deliber- power, ritual, orientation, and community. It is where authorate acts of national imagination. IKN is thus envisioned not ity is asserted, where stories are told, and where people through inherited paradigms alone, but through an engage- gather to form shared values. In cities, centers often begin ment with the urgent challenges of the present and the as symbolic gestures—a temple, a forum, a palace—but aspirations of the future. This chapter reflects on the deeper they quickly evolve into organizing principles for entire idea of centrality and the role capital cities have played societies. Like a hearth in a home, the center satisfies a in urban history, in order to better understand what IKN deep human craving for spatial clarity, social cohesion, and represents specifically in terms of urban design. a connection to the past. It is both physical and conceptual, The idea of a center is as old as civilization itself. Humans a stable reference in an unstable world. No city emerges have always gravitated toward spatial order, defining places without a center, and no civilization is born from a place not only by their function but by their meaning. The center, without one.
21
2/ The Competition That Forged a Vision
Designing Nusantara:
↑ Hill view of production forest prepared for IKN development
40
The Making of Indonesia’s New Capital
↑ Timber harvested from production forest in IKN area
41
2/ The Competition That Forged a Vision
Designing Nusantara:
FOREST IS THE NEW ECONOMY
5-7 Years Cycle Rainforest Coal Site Algae
Existing Forest Protection
Forest Restoration
Reconnecting Habitat Corridor
Alternative Source of Energy
Pioneering Forest Research in the World
Forest First, City Later The design sought to move beyond the conventional idea of a Garden City. Instead, it imagined a Forest City, a city not placed upon the forest but intertwined with it. The difference is not trivial. A garden is cultivated and controlled; a forest is self regulating, untamed, and complex. This distinction carried an ethical dimension. The project’s outlook drew from Indonesia’s ancestral philosophies that placed human life in balance with nature: Tri Hita Karana in Bali, Hamemayu Hayuning Bawana in Java, Pikukuh Karuhun among the Baduy, Tri Tangtu di Buana in Sunda, and Belom Bahadat among the Dayak. These traditions resonate with contemporary ideas of biophilia and biomimicry, in which urban design learns from ecological intelligence. The team held to a guiding principle: forest first, city later. Restoration must precede construction.
54
Emergent High density and diversity Canopy Rain-Sensitive Canopy Understory Multi-Layer Connection
Forest Floor Shade and Permeable Ground Floor
Buttress Roots Efficient Infrastructure (Roots)
The Making of Indonesia’s New Capital
Biomimicry Learn from the wisdom of the natural ecosystem and extract the principles of the Kalimantan Rain Forest to be applied as a system and urban features of the Capital City.
Green Roof
Electric tram
Exclusive for pedestrian and bicycle only
Building to building connectivity
Integrated Utility Tunnel
↑ Biomimicry-driven approaches in creating the forest city
55
3/ Forging a New Heart
Designing Nusantara:
Nature-Inspired Approach Working with the terrain became not only a technical strategy but the foundation of spatial structure. High and low points are retained rather than flattened. The road system bends with the topography, reducing cut-and-fill and enabling the city to settle naturally into the land. These ecological corridors—configured as green fingers surrounding each district—bring nature within a ten-minute reach of residents. They double as natural breezeways that improve thermal comfort, support passive cooling, and mitigate urban heat. Elevation study shaped the arrangement of districts, road hierarchy, and building typologies. Urban fabrics were planned with sensitivity to slopes, ridges, valleys, and riparian systems, responding not only to existing conditions but also to projected climate change. Mixed-use clusters occupy the land between ecological features, adopting variations of the ten-minute-city model. The result resembles an urban archipelago: compact districts surrounded by networks of green and blue that structure how the city breathes, moves, and grows.
↑ Work with the natural terrain, minimizing cut-and-fill to reduce earthwork costs and faster construction.
↑ A topography-responsive road network that minimizes earthworks and preserves interconnectivity through a loop system.
90
The Making of Indonesia’s New Capital
Design Approaches of Nusantara
↑ Preserve low-lying areas as natural water catchments and mitigate flood risk.
↑ Introduce a core structure in the form of a cosmological axis representing Divinity–Human–Nature.
91
3/ Forging a New Heart
Designing Nusantara:
Transformation in Nature Preservation
Ecological Connectivity
At its core, the founding vision of Nusantara imagines a capital not as architecture imposed upon the land, but as a city emerging from it. The site—a production forest with largely intact ecological systems—reinforced this ethic. The aim from the outset was forest first, develop later. Natural features were treated not as constraints but as guides. Contours, riparian zones, soil conditions, ridges, and basins shaped the placement and orientation of urban form. Avoiding land-degrading practices became a core principle, especially given the alluvial soil’s vulnerability to erosion. Minimizing earthworks preserved the site’s longterm resilience and affirmed the belief that the land itself should determine the logic of the capital. Water systems received equal attention. In contrast to many Indonesian cities where rivers are redirected or basins filled—often with disruptive consequences—Nusantara protects natural drainage channels and strengthens riparian zones as ecological corridors. Steering development away from flood-prone basins and steep slopes allows the urban layout to follow the inherent logic of the land: organic, adaptive, and ecologically grounded.
Ecological connectivity through continuity of open space, sustainability of green road corridors, and ecological green corridors
Biodiversity Enhancement Utilization of ecological corridors as habitat parks
Terrestrial Habitat (Flora and Fauna)
Reprofiling a Sequential “Rimba Kota” Ecosystem KIPP’s landscape approach establishes a sequential hierarchy of open spaces that connect to the forest ecosystem, strengthening community and sustainability.
Preserve Vegetation
Preserve Riparian
Aquatic Habitats
Terrestrial Habitat (Flora and Fauna)
Rainwater Harvesting & Management Water runoff management through conserving, harvesting, reuse, and recharge strategies
Minimum Hills Intervention Conserve: Capture and retain drainage patterns as naturally as possible Harvesting: Wet-season capturing of rainfall to offset demand for irrigation during dry season
Managed Landscape
110
Transitional Open Space
Secondary Forest
Reuse & Recharge: Directing stormwater runoff from adjacent road and development into open-space planters filters runoff to promote water efficiency
The Making of Indonesia’s New Capital
The Five Cultural Transformations
N
↑ Green and Blue Network seeks to protect the ecological and hydrological values of the urban landscape, while shaping the fundamental character of Nusantara.
0
1
2
3
4 km
Intermitten Intermitten
Green Green Open Open Space Space
Mangrove Mangrove Zone Zone
Green Green Valley Valley Finger Finger
Tidal Tidal Zone Zone
Buffer Buffer Area Area
Restoration Restoration Area Area (Mangrove) (Mangrove)
Preservation Preservation Area Area (Riparian (Riparian and and Lowland Lowland Forest) Forest)
111
3/ Forging a New Heart
Designing Nusantara:
Consists of Thirty-Four Totems of the Sumbu Kebangsaan West Central East Indonesia Zone
Indonesia Zone
Indonesia Zone
1.
DI Aceh
17. Bali
31. Maluku Utara
2. 3.
Sumatra Utara Sumatra Barat
18. Nusa Tenggara Barat 19. Nusa Tenggara Timur
32. Maluku 33. Papua Barat
4. 5.
Riau Kepulauan Riau
20. Kalimantan Barat 21. Kalimantan Tengah
34. Papua
6. 7.
Jambi Sumatra Selatan
22. Kalimantan Selatan 23. Kalimantan Timur
8. 9.
Bangka Belitung Bengkulu
24. Kalimantan Utara 25. Sulawesi Selatan
10. Lampung 11. Banten 12. DKI Jakarta 13. Jawa Barat 14. Jawa Tengah
26. Sulawesi Barat 27. Sulawesi Tenggara 28. Sulawesi Tengah 29. Gorontalo 30. Sulawesi Utara
15. DI Yogyakarta 16. Jawa Timur
Index
Ornaments of Cultural Pinnacle
Symbols, Icons, Indexes
Index
↖ Implementation of visual components in the totem’s ornament structure
144
The Making of Indonesia’s New Capital
The Five Cultural Transformations
↑ View of Plaza Bhinneka, with its totems illuminated
145
3/ Forging a New Heart
Designing Nusantara:
Transformation in Living The transformation in living addresses a central question for Nusantara: how can the new capital offer a model for modern Indonesian housing that avoids the sprawling and segregated patterns common across the archipelago? The Future Village emerges as the response, translating long-standing communal traditions into a contemporary urban structure.
Indonesian settlements have historically been shaped by proximity, shared spaces, and a porous relationship between private and communal life. The Future Village does not replicate vernacular forms literally. Instead, it adopts their underlying principles, neighbourliness, visibility, mutual support, and permeability, and adapts them to medium-density and vertical arrangements.
Shared Living Facilities
Future Village
Shared facilities and communal spaces for residents
Adaptation of horizontal residential culture on vertical stacking to achieve land efficiency and flexibility
One-Level Connectivity
Green and Smart Living
Continuous and integrated connectivity between residential complexes
Application of technology in the infrastructure of residential areas and units
Collaborative Active Space at Ground Level
Compact Living Modules
Residents’ active collaborative space on the ground floor
184
Modulation of residential units to maximize the use of compact residential space
The Making of Indonesia’s New Capital
The Five Cultural Transformations
Residential-Zone Land-Use Plan Landed Housing Mid-Density Vertical Housing High-Density Vertical Housing
N
0
1
2
3
4 km
185
4/ On the Field
Designing Nusantara:
UNA Urban Network Analysis
↙
This analysis reveals and rates how Nusantara Capital City effectively applied the ten-minute-city concept. The walkability KPIs were analyzed through the parametric calculation of pedestrian accessibility and foot traffic. The analysis consists of three main components: pedestrian/foot traffic, proximity, and straightness. A benchmarking study of highly walkable cities was conducted to measure the initial plan. These together result in metrics such as corridor density, straightness level, and amenity accessibility. Through UNA, Nusantara’s plan could be designed to meet its walkability commitment in providing green mobility to the city.
First UNA conducted with Andres Sevtsuk assessing the ten-minute-city performance of the Precinct Government initial plan. The study identified pedestrian accessibility and foot traffic as key factors in achieving the walkability KPI target. Comparative analysis with highly walkable cities was undertaken as benchmarking.
→ Joint foot-traffic studies the average daily foot traffic per street segment in the Precinct Government. It measures the average foot-traffic within a 600 m radius of the transit hub area.
Pedestrian Accessibility
Foot Traffic
1. “How many destinations (of type X) are within a ten-minute walkshed?”
2. “How to estimate foot-traffic ex-ante, before it can be measured on site?”
Buildings weight = jobs weight = residents
r : 24
Public Transit Stations weight = capacity
Urban Network Analysis Toolbox
Source: Andres Sevtsuk
Reach 300 m
Reach 600 m
Within a ten-minute (600 m) walkshed (along actual walk routes), the occupants of an average building should be able to reach at least:
222
Washington, DC
Melbourne, AU
IKN
≥ 250,000 m2 GFA
1 million
804,000
616,000
405* entrances 47 buildings
596 buildings
173 entrances 47 buildings
≥ 75 Amenities**
169
118
36
≥ 0.25 Rail stations
1.38
0.25
0
≥ 3 Bus stops
Estimated Betweenness 600 m
Avg. over at least r = 600 m region
≥ 200 Entrances
Daily (24h) foot-traffic on an average street segment should be at least:
8.01
2.58 trams
1.06
Building
Building + Building
Transit Avg. over at least r = 600 m region
800 m, b = 0.002, r = 1.1
Washington, DC
Melbourne, AU
(Govt Triangle Stn)
(Flagstaff Stn)
1,868
1,368
Street centerlines
Sidewalks
IKN
≥ 1,000
pax / 24h
1,094
Open access All walkways
The Making of Indonesia’s New Capital
Joint Foot Traffic (Building-to-Building > Transit) The overlay between Building and Public Transit foot traffic. Mean: 1,094 Median: 922
Total Foot-Traffic
600 m
0–105 106–198 199–300 301–403 404–505 506–628 629–799 800–1,070 1,071–1,892
UNA Mobility Simulation in Sub-WP
Mobility Intensity by Street Typology
Total Foot-Traffic 0–200 200–750
Daily commuting and active mobility patterns within KIPP were assessed through UNA to ensure that users can reach destinations (public facilities) within a ten-minute distance and shape the distribution of active corridors on the plan.
750–1,500 1,500–3,000 3,000–4,000 4,000–6,000 6,000–10,000
Underbridge
0–80 80–150
0–1
150–250
1–2
250–400
2–3
400–600
17:36
600–1,000 1,000–3,000
6–7 Street segments with more than 800 trips per hour
Shared Street Penyebrangan Jalan Internal
Total Foot-Traffic
Hourly Intervals
4–5
Through Block Trotoar
Easement
Daily foot-traffic.
Green Promenade Jalur Layang
> 10,000
Sample of Daily Mobility simulation based on time
223
4/ On the Field
Designing Nusantara:
The Making of Indonesia’s New Capital
↓ Plaza Bhinneka
241
URBAN+ Profile
Designing Nusantara:
URBAN+ Profile URBAN+ is a multidisciplinary design studio specializing in urban design, planning, architecture, landscape, and advisory services for government authorities and the private sector, influencing urban development across Indonesia and Asia. With a comprehensive approach that spans from early vision creation and strategic planning to detailed design execution and long-term city planning advisory, the studio supports the development of more sustainable, inclusive, and integrated urban environments. The symbol “+” embodies synergy and collaboration, reflecting the belief that collective efforts can generate outcomes greater than the sum of their parts. It signifies a strong commitment to enhancing cities through design excellence, innovation, and positive values. In 2019, URBAN+ was part of the first-winning team of the Indonesia New Capital design competition and has since worked closely with the government in the implementation of Nusantara, contributing to one of the country’s most significant urban development initiatives. URBAN+ works collaboratively across disciplines to design places rooted in context and local conditions, delivering integrated solutions that meet client needs and support shared goals.
260
URBAN+ Institute is an initiative dedicated to research, observation, study, and design on a wide range of city-related subjects. The Institute aims to provide innovative yet practical solutions through interactive and collaborative methods, engaging communities, academia, practitioners, and government stakeholders. By combining theoretical insight with real-world application, URBAN+ Institute seeks to contribute to the creation of better urban environments and improved quality of life. This book is part of the Institute’s ongoing work to document, reflect on, and share knowledge and experience in city-making. Driven by a passion for learning and knowledge exchange, the Institute continues to develop new ways of thinking and explore better approaches to designing cities. URBAN+ Institute believes that every project can serve as a seed for positive change, empowering communities to grow, adapt, and transform their environment toward a more sustainable and inclusive urban future.
The Making of Indonesia’s New Capital
This book and the broader work of designing Nusantara were made possible by the extensive support of the URBAN+ team, to whom we extend our sincere thanks and gratitude.
Urban Design
Landscape
Sibarani Sofian Ardzuna Sinaga Yugo Phurbojoyo Vallin Tsarina Diana Zerlina Dwitya Hemanto Bianca Martono Sinta Isfandiary Ainsya Daniel Caesar Pratama Billy Gerrardus Santo Clara Sutandi Siti Raihanne Aisya Julia S. Dahlan Anwar Bahir S. Evan Kriswandi Kevin Sutjijadi Beatricia Gilang Pidianku Daniel Jansen Harianto Annisaa Windahasanah Miftah Adisunu Nugroho Alui Danny Antara Febrianto Farhan Auliya Yorangga Citra Arundati Imaniyah Sabita Adrian Prasetyo Murti Zhafirah Annisaa B. Busnia Fakhrira Juniba Hafidza Fara Eduardo Nathan Pradjonggo Aaron Matthew Muhammad Shaff Rizal Pelu
Rahman Andra Wijaya Yasmina Azriani Ian Pranita Florenthius Agung Nugroho Gita Andriani Mohammad Arief Pilar Kobenhavn Zaki Maharani Alicia Wellsan Armia Utami Putri Trestyar Ambarani Alfajri Rahmatullah Stefanus Rio Christian Hogantara Riski Handiansyah Muhammad Hafidz Ahnafuddin Lidhiya Ananda Rizki Puteri
Architecture Vincentius Hermawan Nurul Nur Hadiyani Aris Nuryahya Ilham Budi Setyo Widodo La Ode Fandy Azis Andreas Kurniantoro Diaz Hario Denny Richard Makal Fiona Gracia Kania Atthaya Ulfa Raditya Prabasworo Ken Larasati Priska Patricia Nabila Shofia Ikhsaniyah Kharisma Latiefah Ibrahim Manzil Luthfi Setiawan Jesslyn Winata Aathira Farah Salsabilla Permana
261
Contributors
Designing Nusantara:
Contributors Contributors’ Profiles
Sibarani Sofian is the Founder and Director of URBAN+ and President of IARKI, the Indonesian Association of Urban Designers. A specialist in strategic urban design and planning, he is an urban designer, planner, and business leader with extensive experience across Asia and a growing international presence, including the Middle East. With a background at leading international firms such as SOM and AECOM, he focuses on creating integrated, resilient urban environments across Indonesia’s emerging markets through multidisciplinary approaches. He has led and contributed to award-winning master planning projects across Asia and played a key role in establishing and scaling AECOM’s design and planning operations in Singapore and Indonesia. He currently advises cities and institutions on infrastructure-driven planning, mixed-use developments, and strategic urban projects, working closely with local governments, national ministries, and professional bodies. In 2019, he served as the urban design lead of Nagara Rimba Nusa, the winning proposal for Indonesia’s New Capital City, and has since worked closely with the government on the implementation of Nusantara. David Hutama is an architectural historian, educator, and co-founder of Nenun Ruang, an open education platform dedicated to advancing architecture and design education in Indonesia. He completed graduate studies at Toyohashi University of Technology, Japan, and received his doctoral degree from the AA School of Architecture in London in 2021. With more than two decades of experience in teaching and research, his work spans architectural history, design, and knowledge production. He was commissioned as co-curator of the Indonesian Pavilion at the International Architecture Exhibition, La Biennale di Venezia, in 2014 and 2018. He currently teaches at Universitas Pelita Harapan and serves as a PhD co-supervisor at Ghent University. His recent books include Tropicality: Houses by Andra Matin (Thames & Hudson, 2024), Di Balik Layar (Behind-theScene): Arsitektur Andra Matin (A Publication, 2025), and Tropical Indulgence: The Meru Sanur and Bali Beach Hotel: Yolodi+Maria Architects (Red & White, 2025).
262
Jon Lang is an international consultant on architecture and urban design and an emeritus professor of architecture at the University of New South Wales. Born in India where he obtained his early education, he received his B.Arch degree from the University of the Witwatersrand and master’s and doctorate degrees in City and Regional Planning at Cornell University. He taught at the University of Pennsylvania between 1970 and 1993 heading the joint M.Arch/MCP program in urban design during the 1980s. In Philadelphia he was also director for urban design of ERG/Environmental Research Group Inc. from 1974 to 2010. At UNSW from 1990 until 2017, he headed the School of Architecture between 1996 and 2000 and was a founding member of the Master of Urban Development and Design Program (MUDD) there. He has served as a juror, including chief juror, on international urban design and architecture competitions and has authored books on urban design, on architectural theory and practice, and on modern architecture in India. In 2010 he was awarded the Reed and Mallik Medal by the Institution of Civil Engineers in London. Billy Gerrardus Santo is an urban designer and planner with experience in master planning projects across Indonesia and Asia. He was part of the winning team at URBAN+ in the national capital city design competition in 2019 before returning to lead the editorial team for the book project in 2024. He has collaborated with public institutions, private developers, and international teams on complex, multi-stakeholder projects, focusing on sustainable, human-centered urbanism and spatial storytelling as a bridge between urban theory, policy, and design practice. Diana Zerlina is a Senior Urban Designer/Planner and independent researcher. She has led and worked on numerous multi-scale and multidisciplinary urban design and planning projects, while cultivating her sustained interest in urbanism and public space. Working with URBAN+, she managed the design development of Nusantara’s Government Core Area (KIPP) across spatial scales and contributed to its broader spatial planning efforts.
The Making of Indonesia’s New Capital
Gilang Pidianku is an Urban Designer at URBAN+ and an Independent Spatial Analyst specializing in master planning. His competencies have been recognized by numerous awards in national and international competitions, spanning from student to professional categories. He independently advocates for equitable urban development and coastal resilience through spatial analysis, public writing, and public lectures.
Imaniyah Sabita is an urban designer at URBAN+, with experience in infrastructure and mobility-led planning across national and international contexts. She has contributed to the Nusantara Urban Design Guideline Master Plan, and has worked on various cross-disciplinary projects. Alongside professional practice, she is engaged in community-based initiatives, grounding her work in lived urban realities.
Attribution
Foreword Jon Lang
Preface Sibarani Sofian
Photography and Image Credits All materials presented in this book form part of the planning project for the Nusantara's Government Core Area (KIPP) under the Indonesia Ministry of Public Works and Public Housing (PUPR) during the period 2019–2024. Page 13, Sylvia Wiradarma Page 19, Rahman Andra Wijaya Page 23, (top to bottom) Andalcant via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY 3.0), Adrian Siaril Page 25, Jon Lang Page 26, Harrison Mitchell Page 27, National Capital Planning Commission (USA) Page 32, Ardzuna Sinaga Page 39, both by Rahman Andra Wijaya Page 40, Rahman Andra Wijaya Page 41, Rahman Andra Wijaya Page 42, both by Rahman Andra Wijaya Page 43, Billy Gerrardus Santo Page 47, Erick Morales Oyola Page 55, adapted from Jason Zlotkowski (ZED Collective) Page 70, both by AntiStatics Architecture Page 71, both by Zenin Adrian
Page 79, all by Diana Zerlina Page 81, all by Diana Zerlina Page 107, redrawn by Imaniyah Sabita Page 116, redrawn by Imaniyah Sabita Page 143, (left to right) Gunarta via Wikimedia Commons (CC0 1.0), Kuritafsheen77 Page 155, Jason Zlotkowski (ZED Collective) Page 190, Billy Gerrardus Santo Page 194, Ratu Salsabila Wulandari Page 198, Ratu Salsabila Wulandari Page 200, Ratu Salsabila Wulandari Page 202, Ratu Salsabila Wulandari Page 204, Ratu Salsabila Wulandari Page 206, (bottom) Mario Wibowo Page 207, (top to bottom) Ratu Salsabila Wulandari, Mario Wibowo Page 208, Mario Wibowo Page 212, satellite imagery by Google Earth © Google Page 222, Andres Sevtsuk Page 223, (top) Andres Sevtsuk Page 229, all by Mario Wibowo Page 230, Mario Wibowo Page 234, Mario Wibowo Page 236, Mario Wibowo Page 238, Mario Wibowo Page 239, Mario Wibowo Page 240, Mario Wibowo Page 242, Mario Wibowo Page 243, Mario Wibowo Page 244, Mario Wibowo Page 245, Mario Wibowo Page 246, Mario Wibowo Page 248, both by Sibarani Sofian Page 249, both by Mario Wibowo Page 250, Mario Wibowo Page 252, Mario Wibowo Page 261, Billy Gerrardus Santo
263