This study analyzes the spatial efficiency and equity of park locations in a housing site development district undergoing reconstruction (redevelopment) projects, and based on this analysis, proposes directions for park site selection applicable i...
This study analyzes the spatial efficiency and equity of park locations in a housing site development district undergoing reconstruction (redevelopment) projects, and based on this analysis, proposes directions for park site selection applicable in the redevelopment process. Recently, urban parks have grown in importance beyond mere green spaces, serving as key public spaces that promote citizens' health and leisure, foster community building, and help structure urban space. However, existing research on park location ahs largely focused on broad reviews at the administrative district (dong) or local government level, limiting its applicability to the appropriate site evaluation needed at the scale of reconstruction project zones, where large-scale park provision actually takes place. Furthermore, current park planning tends to focus on satisfying land-use and legal requirements within the project site itself, without sufficiently considering connectivity with surrounding areas or accessibility for use.
Accordingly, this study quantitatively evaluated the efficiency and equity of different park location types for reconstruction complexes within the Sanggye 1st and 2nd Stage housing site development district in Nowon-gu, Seoul. Efficiency was analyzed using Integration and Choice measures derived from Space Syntax, while equity was assessed based on service beneficiary ranges derived from de facto (living) population data. Through this approach, the study compared the characteristics of various park location types, including complex-interior-centered, road-node-centered, major-pedestrian-axis-linked, and district-unit-plan-linked types.
The anlysis found that the efficiency and equity of park locations were influenced more by the pedestrian network connected to surrounding living zones and the distribution of the de facto population than by the internal spatial structure of the complex itself. In particular, locations linked to major pedestrian axes, central nodes, and public space axes within district uni plans showed higher Integration and Choice values, along with an increasing trend in the population served. However, in some complexes, efficiency and equity were not maximized at the same location, indicating a need to balance accessibility and service coverage: in cases where the complex's internal pedestrian network formed a central structure, interior locations were sometimes found to perform better.
Synthesizing these findings, the study suggests that when determining park locations in reconstruction projects, planners should move beyond the conventional focus on complex-interior-centered approaches and instead adopt a broader living-zone perspective that includes adjacent residential areas, central commercial districts, major pedestrian axes, and nodes. The study also confirms the need to incorporate Space Syntax-based spatial structure indicators into the park site evaluation system, and to establish an integrated planning framework that simultaneously considers both efficiency and equity. These findings are expected to serve as foundational data for enhancing the publicness and usability of parks in future reconstruction projects and for shaping sustainable urban spatial structures.