Evans 도시재생 평가 모형과 그린 어바니즘의 통합 적용:역사·문화적 사례를 중심으로 = Integrating Evans' Urban Regeneration Evaluation Model with Green Urbanism: Focusing on Historic-Cultural Cases

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study presents an exploratory ex‑post assessment of three Korean cases of historical–cultural urban regeneration: a traditional landscape commercial street (Hwangridan‑gil, Gyeongju), an industrial‑heritage reuse campus (Samsung Creative Campus, Daegu), and a historical–cultural public‑infrastructure conversion project (Seoullo 7017, Seoul). Building on Evans’s culture‑led regeneration triad (physical, social, economic) and extending it with an environmental domain informed by Green Urbanism principles (walkability; compact/mixed use; green–blue systems and micro‑scale thermal comfort; governance and operation), the study develops and applies a four‑domain integrated assessment rubric at the 500‑meter neighbourhood scale.

The assessment framework operationalizes core indicators in each domain—access and connectivity, compact/mixed use, green–blue infrastructure and thermal comfort, governance and participation, and commercial/cultural activity—using a 1–5 rubric. Quantitative measures (distance, density, entropy, facility counts, market activity indices) are combined with qualitative evidence drawn from field observation, public documents, and operational records. To capture experiential quality, Google review texts are analysed via aspect–sentiment dictionaries focusing on wayfinding, shade and seating, congestion, cleanliness, friendliness, and programme experience. Rubric scores are assigned based on this mixed evidence, and inter‑rater reliability is checked through an external expert’s independent rating; Cohen’s kappa (κ = 0.72) indicates substantial agreement.

Across the three cases, a common pattern emerges: while arrival and movement have clearly improved, the “quality of staying” remains relatively weak. Within this local walking catchment, public‑transport access and basic walkability are generally adequate, but the continuity of shade, seating, water features, and clear wayfinding is uneven, especially under seasonal and peak‑hour congestion. Operational structures—such as regular programming, role‑sharing among actors, and the disclosure and learning of key performance indicators (KPIs)—tend to lag behind one‑off physical upgrades. Type‑specific tendencies are also apparent. Hwangridan‑gil secures strong pedestrian demand based on Gyeongju’s historical identity, yet recurrent crowding, uneven micro‑scale environmental comfort, and gentrification risks suggest the need to institutionalise congestion management and inclusive governance. Samsung Creative Campus exhibits a distinct sense of place and a reasonable level of internal accessibility, but its activity level relies heavily on events and F&B uses; more predictable, modular year‑round programming and clearer connections to the wider urban core are required. Seoullo 7017 substantially improves connectivity between major transit nodes and surrounding districts, but whether the elevated walkway functions as a comfortable everyday place depends on entrance legibility, the continuity of shade and seating, and crowd management. Environmental outcomes are partial and highly sensitive to micro‑scale design and operation.

Academically, this study links Evans’s cultural regeneration framework with Green Urbanism to propose a reproducible, neighbourhood‑scale ex‑post diagnostic model for historical–cultural regeneration, integrating rubric‑based rating, text mining, and inter‑rater reliability checks. At a policy level, it identifies type‑specific priorities—such as congestion management and shared governance for traditional landscape streets, modular programming and thermal‑comfort improvements for industrial‑heritage reuse, and segment‑based crowd and comfort management for linear public spaces—and connects them to domestic legal and institutional tools including the Special Act on Urban Regeneration, enacted in 2013, and local walking and landscape ordinances. Limitations include the small number of cases, limited before–after data for some indicators, reliance on review‑based perception data, the exploratory nature of the rubric, and the use of a uniform 500‑meter analysis radius that may not fully capture the actual influence area of each project. Consequently, the results are better interpreted as indicative patterns rather than generalisable causal proof. Even so, the proposed four‑domain checklist and neighbourhood‑scale lens offer a practical starting point for systematic ex‑post evaluation of historical–cultural urban regeneration that jointly addresses access, staying quality, and operational governance.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 제1장 서 론 1
• 제1절 연구 배경 및 필요성 1
• 제2절 연구 목적 및 질문 4
• 제3절 연구의 범위 및 방법 5
• 제2장 이론적 배경 및 선행연구 고찰 8
• 제1절 지속가능도시와 그린 어바니즘 8
• 1. 지속가능도시 논의의 발전(1987-2010) 8
• 2. 지속가능도시의 국제 규범과 순환 거버넌스 10
• 3. 그린 어바니즘 이론: Beatley, Lehmann, Newman 14
• 제2절 도시재생과 문화기반역사문화적 도시재생 23
• 1. 도시재생의 개념과 특성 23
• 2. Evans의 문화기반 도시재생 개관 29
• 3. 역사문화적 도시재생의 범위와 분류 31
• 4. 역사문화적 도시재생의 전략 유형 33
• 5. 역사문화적 도시재생의 평가 기준과 운영 프레임 36
• 제3절 선행 연구 고찰 43
• 1. 국내외 선행 연구 43
• 2. 선행연구의 한계와 본 연구의 차별성 50
• 제4절 외국의 도시재생 우수사례 51
• 1. 선진 외국의 도시재생 추진 배경 52
• 2. 해외 우수사례의 주요 특징 57
• 제3장 연구방법론 및 사례 59
• 제1절 연구의 분석틀 59
• 제2절 통합 분석지표 구성 62
• 제3절 조사설계 분석방법과 자료 수집 68
• 제4절 사례별 현황 70
• 1. 사례 선정의 기준 70
• 2. 연구 대상 사례 72
• 제4장 사례 진단 및 평가 121
• 제1절 사후 성과평가의 구성과 한계 121
• 1. 평가 모형과 진단 절차의 개관 121
• 2. 평가 모형 적용 범위와 한계 122
• 제2절 감성분석 텍스트 마이닝과 통합지표의 신뢰도 124
• 1. 감성분석 신뢰도 검정 124
• 2. 통합지표 신뢰도 검정 131
• 3. 정성 데이터와 정량 지표의 교차 검증 133
• 제3절 종합 진단 135
• 1. 4개 영역 통합 평가: 루브릭 결과 135
• 2. 사례별 우선 개선 과제 146
• 3. 사례의 전후 비교 150
• 4. 국내 유사사례 비교 155
• 5. 유형별 통합 정리 185
• 제5장 결 론 190
• 제1절 연구 결과의 요약 190
• 1. 연구 질문에 대한 응답 190
• 2. 유형별 사례 평가 결과 190
• 3. 공통 경향과 유형별 차이 191
• 제2절 학술적 기여 192
• 1. 이론적개념적 기여 192
• 2. 지속가능발전지속가능도시 논의에 대한 기여 192
• 3. 방법론적측정틀 제안 193
• 4. 국내 제도정책 논의에 대한 기여 194
• 제3절 정책적 함의 194
• 1. 공통적인 정책 방향 194
• 2. 유형별 정책실무 시사점 195
• 3. 법제도 및 사후평가 체계 개선에 대한 함의 195
• 제4절 연구의 한계와 향후 과제 196
• 1. 연구의 한계 196
• 2. 향후 연구 과제 198
• 참고문헌 200
• Abstract 216
• 부록 219