都市 및 住居環境整備豫定區域 選定基準을 위한 指標開發과 適用

Development and Application of Alternative Selection Indicators for the Proposed Urban and Residential Arrangement District

1. CONTENTS (1) RESEARCH OBJECTIVES Nationwide, presently more than 2,500 urban and residential environment arrangement plans which primarily intend to restore urban functions and put the neighborhood and its buildings in good conditions are under consideration or implementation, Nonetheless, most of them have not been free from the vortex of conflicts and disputes as the district designation standards of urban and residential environment arrangement have not reflected district characteristics in full On the one hand they are too simple to expose complicate site conditions, On the other band they are too ambiguous to apply objective sub-standards towards old and dilapidated buildings. (2) RESEARCH METHOD This study focuses on the experiences of the three local governments with similar sizes. It examines similarities and differences of the district designation standards of urban and residential environment arrangement not to mention the definition of old and dilapidated buildings, Furthermore, this study pays attention to developing alternative district designation standards and applying them to a specific example to test their appropriateness and suitability. (3) RESEARCH RESULTS This study finds that the satisfying ratios are more than 70% in residential environment arrangement and housing redevelopment projects and more than 60% in urban environment arrangement and housing reconstruction projects, respectively. In terms of weighted value, the most important two indicators are the dilapidated degree and the abandoned housing units; followed by the unlicensed and empty housing units, the deteriorated degree, and the road access degree. 2. RESULTS This study reveals the fact that the existing urban and residential environment arrangement district could be repealed if the alternative designation standards are applied. That is, using a Cheongju example, the district under consideration could not fulfill the designation standards as its ratio is no more than 33%.