http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
여혜진(Yeo Hae-Jin),백세나(Baik Ce-Na) 대한건축학회 2011 대한건축학회논문집 Vol.27 No.4
This study examines the characteristics of neighborhood in residential environments using an in-depth case study of GuroㆍGaribong-dong area in Seoul. It investigates the typological arrangement of the neighborhood territory and facility-using activity patterns of residents with an inquiry of how residents are likely to cognize and use the residential environments and structuralize the neighborhood territory. The four types of neighborhood territory and activity pattern are highlighted: for neighborhood territory, (1) clustering pattern, (2) scattering pattern, (3) expanding pattern, (4) one-block pattern, and for activity pattern, (a) street-oriented pattern, (b) short-distance pattern, (c) long-distance pattern, (d) combination pattern. The findings are, first, dominant types are clustering pattern with street-oriented pattern. Second, cognitive neighborhood territory is in general much smaller than Perry's Neighborhood Unit, administrative unit and irrelevant to population statistical unit. Third, cognitive neighborhood territory and activity pattern is structuralized its domain and centricity loosely by subway stations and open space, but not by public buildings and schools. The findings substantiate the actual neighborhood varies in its scale, form, major land use, and boundary compared to planned neighborhood unit.
도시 준공공공간의 보행활성화 방안 -건물전면공간을 중심으로-
여혜진 ( Hae Jin Yeo ),임희지 ( Hee Ji Lim ),맹다미 ( Da Mi Maeng ),백세나 ( Ce Na Baik ),이승희,김진아,정재용,한광야,소갑수 서울시정개발연구원 2009 연구보고서 Vol.2009 No.41
While the street-and-building interface has been a key element in urban design for better street in New York, Boston, London and Tokyo, there has been a little attention to this practice in Seoul countparts. This difference stems from the identification of public realm on the street and public function for pedestrian activity. The street-and-building interface in Seoul is currently defined as a semi-public space but in reality it is a privately-owned space. This study aims to redefine the street-and-building interface as a semi-public space making a huge impact on the scenery of public space "street" and creating the clear character of urban streetscape for better pedestrian flow and pedestrian activity just like the building does. It also delivers several design principles and institutional approaches for better semi-public space. Several streets in each city are selected for an in-depth analysis of the street-and-building interface. Specific cases selected are Teheran-ro, Kangnam-daero, Echondong-gil, Garosu-gil(Seoul), 5th Avenue(New York), Newbury Street(Boston), London Wall Street, Brompton Road(London), Naka-dori, Hibiya-dori, Omotesando-dori, Aoyama-dori(Tokyo). The spatial characteristics / pedestrian function and land use / regulations of street-and-building interface has been reviewed. In-depth study is focused on several aspects of street-and-building interface; scale, spatial characteristics, pedestrian circulation, land use, policy regulation. It is an effort to capture a detailed pattern of street-and-building interaction regarding pedestrian flow and pedestrian activity. Typology of street-and-building interface is identified in terms of the spatial characteristics and functions. Spatial types of the street-and-building interface are first, street-widening type, second, front-access·front-connecting type, and third, plaza type. Functional types are first, intermediary between street and building, second, structuring pedestrian-oriented streetscape, and third, holistic urban design language for place-making The findings are as follows: 1) all of the case study areas except London have more space in front of the buildings by setback, 2) streets in Seoul have the most wide variations in setback and those in London have little variations forming orderly street-wall, 3) street-and-building interface type in Seoul is mostly simple street-widening vis-a-vis those in New York, Boston, London and Tokyo are mostly front-access·front-connecting type and plaza type, 4) street furniture, subway station and facilities in interface area are a lot and privately occupied in Seoul cases rather than the other case causing obstruction of pedestrian flow and pedestrian activity. 5) commercial streets in New York, Boston, London and Tokyo well maintained ground level land use such as small shops, restaurant, cafe and cultural use etc to facilitate pedestrian activities. Seoul regulates the street and street-and-building interface by a general statute such as Building Law and Planning Law. However New York, Boston, London and Tokyo regulate them by a special statute such as special district control and design guideline. Recently New York Zoning Ordinances strictly regulate by incentive a plaza type front space and prohibit ambiguous space for better pedestrian activity and orderly street wall. This is strictly implemented especially for important commercial corridors such as 5th Avenue. Policy recommendations are as follows, 1) deliberation of street-and-building interface on the basis of street characters, 2) set-up the design guildeline for the variety of semi-public space which deliver Seoul`s livability and dynamic of social activities, 3) incentive differentiation Strategy according to the contribution of pedestrian flow and pedestrian activity, and 4) street-and-building unitary design-management system.
주택재개발사업의 공공성과 사업성 증진을 위한 민관역할 재정립
맹다미(Maeng, Da-Mi),이동훈(Lee, Dong-Hoon),백세나(Baik, Ce-Na) 대한건축학회 2016 대한건축학회논문집 Vol.32 No.2
Low economic growth and recession in real estate market resulted in sluggish implementation in housing redevelopment projects and affect inadequate provision of public facilities and housing. This study aims to identify the issues of the current provision system of public facilities and housing in the housing redevelopment projects of Seoul and find solutions by comparing with the cases of Japanese redevelopment projects. Keeping the balance between publicness and profitability of the projects is one of the main principles which can be accomplished by reinforcing the public-private partnership. This study suggests three systems as the way of enhancing publicness and profitability of the housing redevelopment projects: (1) government financial supports for establishing infrastructure, (2) introduction of public copartner system, and (3) risk-taking of private sectors.
남원석(Won-Seok Nam),김수경(Su-Kyoung Kim),백세나(Ce-Na Baik) 서울연구원 2016 서울연구원 정책과제연구보고서 Vol.- No.-
Since 2012, the Seoul Metropolitan Government has allocated budget to 10 Housing Support Centres. The centres have been assessing the housing issues for low-income households and offering rental subsidy to those in need. Now that the Central Government and Seoul Housing & Communities Corporation (SH Corporation) are participating in Housing Support Centre’s management, they expect to further fuel the growth of the centre’s role and activities. In order to achieve this advancement, all the Housing Support Centres should improve their consulting skills and the quality of their service; therefore, this paper describes the Housing Support Centre’s evaluation system. The evaluation system presents the evaluation categories, rating scales, processes, and how to use the assessment results. First, the evaluation category is divided into 34 factors based on its inputs, activities, outputs, and outcomes. Each factor is evaluated by using a 4-point rating scale, such as poor, fair, average, and good. With use of these evaluation factors and rating scale, each centre first conducts an evaluation by itself. After this step, professional evaluators review the outcomes and scrutinise the documents which can confirm the self-evaluation. Finally, the evaluation team pinpoints each centre’s problems and offers the centres an opportunity to assess the issues. Using the above processes, we tried to evaluate the 10 current Housing Support Centres in Seoul and we found that the results varied among centres. For this reason, the evaluation team should play an important role in proposing how each centre can maintain consistency in service quality. Lastly, this paper recommends 7 necessary factors to continue the application of the evaluation system: continuous improvements of the evaluation system, housing support centre’s activity guidelines, professional electronic data system, building a website, increasing the number of centres, hiring more staff, and cooperative public-private partnership. All of these factors will help the housing support centres to perform better management in the future.