DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT
Bandung was positioned in the 1920’s to become the new adminsitrative capital for the whole country relocating from Batavia (Jakarta) and as such grand plans were made in a city plan that would create a gracious and spacious government district as well as sufficient housing and new public amenities. It is not therefore surprising that the buildings that were constructed in that period were of the finest standards in the world and the city plan, one celebrating the period of modernism.
If these efforts are examined today, it can be seen that the remains of this old plan still create a unique and distinctive identity for the city. Development in these districts is circumscribed and protected by designation as conservation districts so that the historical environment may be maintained as an integral part and important dynamic of new city development.  Preservation and conservation is seen by some as an early step in improving the livability of the city for its residents.
Conservation districts provide the ‘unique identity’ that is often lacking in newer settlements and can be a tool to market the city through tourism.  This development concept can be seen in many of the best-loved and most-acclaimed cities in the world.
From the angle of conservation philosophy alone, preservation is no barrier to careful development, as long as the development is wisely implemented, and planning ordinances are honestly carried out.

PRESERVATION INITIATIVES
Heritage conservation initiatives have long been an important element in successful city growth in strategies in countries around the world.  In the United States for example, incentives that include tax holidays and other special considerations protect the shared heritage.  In the United Kingdom, there is a program known “Carrot and Stick” that helps communities protect their heritage.  In Indonesia itself, there are incentives and de-incentives spelled out in the national constitution concerning the protection of the national patrimony (Undang-undang No. 5 tahun 1992 tentang benda cagar budaya, dan Kepmendikbud No. 062/U/1995, No. o63/U/1995, dan No. 064/U/1995).
The implementation of heritage conservation in the country, and specifically in Bandung, are not yet effective.  The reasons are many but include primarily the lack of a defined and accepted inventory of protected sites and monuments that would serve to ensure their legal standing under the law.  I would like to note here that since the 1992 constitutional inclusion noted above, not one case of illegal demolition has been brought to court! 
Other problems emerge as well concerning the lack of enabling legislation that must flow from a national constitutional amendment and provide the vehicles for legal action at the state, city and county levels.  However, in the Province of West Java, where Bandung is located, there are heritage protection ordinances that are not yet operational because details in the ordinances are not well enunciated.  There are, for example, no written references to what is specifically permitted and what, under the ordinances, are defined as crimes. Further, the use of financial incentives has not been implemented and so there is neither an incentive nor effective de-incentive to motivate public and private owners of heritage buildings and sites to follow the ordinances.  Worst case is ‘midnight demolition’ but the ordinances also include rules about maintenance that have no clout in the public view.  There is also a lack of understanding by the owners of heritage sites to their community relevancy and the sense of community participation to support private heritage with public and/or private funding or technical assistance.
These problems are compounded by the lack of public organizational infrastructure, public boards, civic committees, that are helpful to the public or able to help fairly adjudicate decisions on heritage conservation issues for the city. And in Bandung, there is at this time no money or political will to support committees of this sort.
In the implementation of conservation of historic sites and monuments, and the control of these precious community assets, the authority of the city government is still non-existent, due largely to the fact that the various laws and ordinances grant no authority at a local level, the authority, for instance, of giving sanctions to those who break the laws.  This authority is still embedded in the federal government alone. 
In the midst of  steep development pressure the maintenance of the old buildings and districts is seen as a barrier to new development especially to the deveopment of new commercial complexes. 
The historic sites  and individual monuments which are seen as valuable assets by heritage practitioners and some tourism officials, and offer identity and grace to the community, are seen by developers as thorns in their efforts to smoothly (and profitably!) redevelop valuable center city areas due to the restrictions on development in protected districts.  The city of Bandung is but one of the large cities in Java that is undergoing this sort of turmoil.   One by one the old historic monuments are demolished, replaced by bland and characterless commercial developments such as malls, row houses and apartments  If this continues without restraint, Bandung will lose its precious identity and begin to resemble thousands of other places here and around the world. Part of the special identity of Bandung resides in its store of Art Deco monuments which never fail to awe visitors from Europe and North America.
 

Other problems emerge as well concerning the lack of enabling legislation that must trickle down from a national constitutional amendment and provide the vehicles for legal action at the state, city and county levels.  (see Drawing 1)

Historic districts, environments, historic monuments and sites, including archeological sites exist in cities and counties, however their historic importance is only recognized and protected by national authority at this time.  See Drawing 2.  Heritage assets require listing in inventories at each level of public administration and classification of their levels of protection which are listed as A, B or C, depending on specific criteria. Many of these monuments and sites have been lost or demolished as the result of burgeoning city and county development needs and the lack of appreciation by the public of the importance of these cultural assets.  One of the reasons that heritage conservation efforts are not often successful is that generally the government is more interested in creating government-funded projects and tend to identify with developers (particularly large commercial developers) so that local managers can find new sources of tax revnues for their districts.  In this sometimes unhealthy relationship, questionable financial dealings are often transacted, and the lack of government transparency has called into question some of the more egregious practices. 
In turning the wheels of government for the goal of equitable community prosperity, there need to be appropriate laws that guarantee positive community development practices.  The one aspect that must be in place is that government administration should function according to the law.  Creating an open and transparent body of legal certainties will create a development environment that will aid social stability and equity. While the axion ”it is love not laws that will save the heritage of mankind” is not far from our thoughts, the legal framework must be in place, monitored and adjudicated openly so that development can proceed without anarchy and social chaos.