著者

浅野 純一郎

出版者

日本建築学会

雑誌

日本建築学会計画系論文集 (ISSN:13404210)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.86, no.785, pp.1936-1947, 2021-07-30 (Released:2021-07-30)

参考文献数

7

---

This study clarifies the relation between expansion process of Urbanization Promotion Area (UPA) in the past and the designation of Residential Inducing Area (RIA) as recent Urban Facility Location Plan by comparative studies of 10 local cities. We analyze characteristics of the relation mentioned above, concretely aerial quantitative index and form of designated area, and discuss land use characteristics of removed area from RIA. The followings are concluded. 1) While removed area from RIA is generally larger in comparatively recent included area into UPA, the area which has been included in UPA at the first area division or in earlier revision is also removed widely in cities which have removed RIA at large scale.2) In the process of urbanizing there are 6 types of urban expansion form, on the other, there are 4 types of urban shrinkage form in depopulating. 4 types are ‘shrinking from peripheral part’, ‘sponge’, ‘shrinking along linking axis with another city’ and ‘finger’. Urban shrinking types of urban form depends on the extent of shrinkage.3) On the relation between removed area and location or densely inhabited district (DID), area having included in UPA at the 1st area division has different characteristic from area included in revision of area division. From the viewpoint for keeping DID or keeping balanced urban form, it is appropriate to be removed from area included in revision of area division. Regarding on land use, it proves appropriate that removied areas included lots of industrial area, roadside area and interchanges. But in the suburban area, because there are many examples including good infrastructure area with land readjustment especially in area included in revision of area division, careful verification on the appropriateness would be necessary.4) In the city of ‘shrinking from peripheral part’ or ‘sponge’, those forms are characterized by removing problematic area to reside, like industrial area, roadside or poor infrastructure area, on site. On the other, in the city of ‘shrinking along linking axis with another city’ and ‘finger’, which remove infrastructure area widely, RIA is designated on the convenience for public transit like railway or bus service line, depending not on appropriateness of removing areas characteristics. Because Urban Facility Location Plan seeks for city planning image in 20 years future, it is considered that some cities might set removing area widely not coinciding to actual shrinking situation. It might be natural that widely removing RIA, widely included appropriate area to reside, for example, good infrastructure area in suburban. And removing RIA widely reaches lastly at ‘finger’ formed by ‘compact plus network’ concept. But some local cities have no better public transit service network fundamentally. Therefore, the appropriateness of removing from RIA is verified carefully along each city situation.