(A) study on the evaluation system for improvement of publicity and design quality of special architectural district : focused on planning for apartment complexes

국문 초록 (Abstract)

1960년 이후 급격한 산업화 및 도시화 과정에서 신속한 주택 공급 및 인프라 조성 등을 위하여 환경, 역사, 문화적 자산 등 지역의 개발 여건을 고려하지 않은 일률적 관계 법규 및 기준 적용이 이뤄졌다. 이는 전통적인 도시조직과 구조의 훼손과 함께 고층·고밀의 획일적인 도시경관을 양산하는 결과를 초래하였다. 또한 기술의 급속한 발전과 4차 산업혁명 시대가 도래함에 따라 첨단 정보통신기술의 적용과 건설 기술의 혁신, 새로운 건설소재 등의 개발이 활발히 이뤄지면서, 소방, 방재, 구조 등 건설 관련 기술들이 발달하였지만, 법·제도의 경직성으로 인하여 적용에 한계가 있다는 문제가 지속적으로 제기되어왔다.
이 같은 제도적 한계에 대응하여 2007년 건축법 개정을 통하여 특별건축제도를 도입하여, 기존의 건축법규에 구애받지 않고 각종 법령 및 기준을 적용 받지 않거나 완화해 적용하고 관련법령에 의하여 처리 절차도 통합할 수 있도록 하였다. 특별건축구역 제도의 조입은 기존의 경직된 법 체계에서 벗어나 새로운 기술의 적용이나 창의적인 건축 설계 등 새로운 시도를 가능하게 하고, 건축물의 디자인품질 및 경관적 가치의 향상과 함께 그 주변지역의 공공성을 증진 시킬 수 있는 새로운 대안으로 평가받고 있다.
하지만, 제도 도입 이후 구체적인 평가기준 및 운영지침 부족 등 평가체계의 부재로 인하여 관계 당사자들 간에 제도 도입 취지에 대한 공감대 형성이 부족하고, 법제도 운영과 관련된 해당 주체 간에도 법제도의 해석이 달라 다양한 의견을 조율하지 못함으로써 당초 도입취지와는 달리 활성화가 이뤄지지 못하고 있다.
이에 본 연구는 특별건축구역 제도의 도입 취지인 ‘공공성 확보’와 창의적 디자인을 통한 ‘디자인 품질 향상’에 대한 평가항목을 도출하고, 계획 평가에 있어서 다양한 평가의견을 조율하기 위한 평가항목의 중요도 및 우선순위를 도출하고자 한다. 또한, 특별건축구역의 운영절차별 평가항목의 차등화 적용 필요성 분석을 통하여 제도의 효율적 운영을 위한 평가체계를 제시하고자 하였다.
첫째, 특별건축구역 계획 평가시 공공성 측면에서의 개방성과 안전성, 접근성, 디자인 품질 측면에서의 다양성에 우선순위를 둔 평가 수 있는 평가 기준 마련이 필요하다. 세부적으로는 개방성 측면에서는 시각적 개방성, 안전성 측면에서는 보행자 안전, 경관성 측면에서는 형태 및 매스디자인, 접근성 측면에서는 보행접근성, 조화성 측면에서는 주변환경·건물과의 조화, 다양성 측면에서는 디자인 특화계획과 다양한 건물 형태를 중점적으로 평가하여야 한다.
둘째, 특별건축구역 지정시 평가항목을 간소화하여 부담은 경감하되, 건축심의시 평가항목별로 구체적 평가를 실시하여 공공성 확보과 창의적인 디자인 실현할 수 있도록 운영 절차 개선이 필요하다. 특별건축구역 지정시에는 도시 및 주변 지역과의 관계성 측면에서 조화성, 영향성, 개방성, 접근성, 다양성을 중점적으로 평가하고, 건축심의단계에서는 구역지정시 계획 내용에 기반한 디자인 품질 전반에 대한 평가를 실시하는 평가체계의 개선이 필요하다.
셋째, 계획 평가 결과 디자인품질 관련 평가항목에 비하여 공공성 관련 평가항목들의 점수가 낮게 분석되어, 공공성 확보를 위한 평가체계 및 시스템 개선이 필요하다. 세부적으로 무장애계획, 지역커뮤니티 향상, 기존대지 및 자연 순응, 시설 가변성 및 확장성, 신기술의 적용 항목의 계획 개선을 위한 평가기준이 필요하다. 다만, 시설 가변성 및 확장성, 신기술의 적용 등은 미래 수요 및 기술 발전을 모두 반영하기에는 한계가 있기 때문에 타 평가항목과 분리하여 별도의 평가 기준 및 유도 방안 마련이 필요하다.
특별건축구역은 창의적인 디자인을 지닌 건축물의 건축을 통하여 공공성을 증진, 도시 경관 개선, 건설기술 수준 향상 및 건축 관련 제도 개선을 도모하기 위하여 2008년 처음 도입되었다. 그 동안 구체적인 평가기준 및 운영지침 부족 등 평가체계의 부재로 인하여 제도의 활성화가 이뤄지지 못했다. 이 같은 이유로 2021년 11월 3일 국토교통부는 특별건축구역 활성화를 위한 운영 가이드라인을 재정하여 시행하였다. 제도의 활성화 및 확산을 위해서는 운영 가이드라인과 함께 평가항목 및 평가기준의 구체화 등 평가체계에 대한 지속적인 논의와 개선 노력이 필요하다.
넷째, 특별건축구역의 건축법 특례 적용을 통하여, 현행법보다 공공성과 디자인 품질이 우수한 건축계획이 실현되는데 기여하고 있다. 특례 사항에 대한 지속적인 검토와 모니터링을 통하여 제도의 유연성 확보를 위한 확대와 적용 기준을 체계화 한다면 공공성 확보와 디자인 품질 향상을 위한 특별건축구역제도의 취지 실현에 기여할 수 있을 것이다.
본 연구는 특별건축구역 제도의 평가 체계 및 운영 개선의 측면에서 공공성 확보와 디자인품질 향상 측면의 평가 항목과 운영절차 별 평가항목의 평가 필요성을 분석하고자 하였다. 평가항목의 중요도 제시를 통하여 정성적 평가들 간의 우선적 고려사항을 제시하고, 운영 절차별 평가항목 차등 적용의 필요성을 검증한데 의의가 있으며, 향후 관련 제도 및 운영 방향 개선의 기초자료 활용 될 수 있을 것이다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Since 1960, uniform related laws and standards have been applied without considering regional development conditions such as environmental, historical and cultural assets for rapid housing supply and infrastructure creation in the process of rapid industrialization and urbanization. This resulted in the mass production of a uniform high-rise and high-density urban landscape along with damage to traditional urban organizations and structures. In addition, the application of advanced IT technology, innovation of architecture technology, and development of advanced new materials are actively taking place due to the recent rapid technological development and the advent of the 4th industrial revolution era. Even though fire fighting, disaster prevention and structure technologies have been developed through such technological development, limitations in the application of new technologies have been continuously raised due to rigid laws and systems.
In response, through the revision of the Building Act in 2007, the ‘Special Architectural District’ system was introduced, which allows various laws and standards to be excluded or relaxed regardless of existing building laws and regulations and integrates processing procedures in accordance with relevant laws and regulations. The designation of a special architectural district is evaluated as a new alternative to enable the realization of new construction technologies or creative architectural design that require new attempts outside existing regulations, improve the design quality of buildings, and improve the publicity and landscape value of the surrounding area.
Since the introduction of the system, there has been a lack of consensus among related parties on the purpose of introducing the system due to the lack of specific evaluation standards and operation guidelines, and the interpretation of the legal system is different between the subjects related to the operation of the legal system so that the system is unable to coordinate various opinions. Therefore, the system has not been activated, contrary to the original purpose of introduction.
Therefore, this study aims to derive evaluation items for ‘securing publicity’ and ‘improvement of design quality’ through creative design, which are the purposes of introduction of special architectural district system, and to derive the importance and priority of evaluation items to coordinate various evaluation opinions in planning evaluation. In addition, it was intended to present an evaluation system for the efficient operation of the system through the analysis of the necessity of differential application of evaluation items for each operation procedure of special architectural districts.
First, when evaluating the special architectural district plan, it is necessary to prepare evaluation criteria that prioritize openness, safety, accessibility in terms of publicity and diversity in terms of design quality. In detail, visual openness in terms of openness and pedestrian safety in terms of safety and form and mass design in terms of landscape, pedestrian accessibility in terms of accessibility, harmony with surrounding environments and buildings, and various building types in terms of harmony should be evaluated.
Second, it is necessary to reduce the burden by simplifying the evaluation items when designating a special architectural district, but improving the operation procedure to secure publicity and realizing creative design by conducting specific evaluations for each evaluation item during construction review is also needed. When designating a special architectural district, it is necessary to improve the evaluation system to focus on harmony, influence, openness, accessibility, and diversity in terms of relationship with cities and surrounding areas, and to evaluate overall design quality based content of the plan in the review stage.
Third, as the result of the plan evaluation, the score of the evaluation items related to publicity was analyzed lower than that of the evaluation items related to design quality, so it is necessary to improve the evaluation system to secure publicity. In detail, evaluation criteria are needed for barrier-free planning, regional community improvement, existing land and natural adaptation, facility variability and scalability, and application of new technologies items. However, since facility variability, scalability, and application of new technologies are limited to be able to reflect both future demand and technological development, it is necessary to prepare separate evaluation criteria and induction measures separately from other evaluation items.
Special architectural district was first introduced in 2008 to promote publicity, improve urban landscape, improve construction technology level, and improve construction-related policies through the construction of buildings with creative designs. Until now, the policy has not been activated due to the absence of an evaluation system, such as a lack of specific evaluation standards and operation guidelines. To solve this problem, on November 3, 2021, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport reorganized and implemented the operation guidelines for revitalizing special architectural districts. In order to revitalize and spread the system, continuous discussion and improvement efforts on the evaluation system, such as specifying evaluation items and evaluation criteria, are required along with operation guidelines.
Fourth, through the special provision application of the Building Act of Special Architectural District, it is contributing to the realization of a building plan with superior publicity and design quality than the current law. If the expansion and application standards for securing flexibility of the policy are systematized through continuous review and monitoring of special provisions, it will contribute to the realization of the purpose of the special architectural district policy to secure publicity and improve design quality.
This study attempted to analyze the necessity of evaluation items of securing publicity and improving design quality and evaluation items of each operational procedure in terms of improving the evaluation system and operation of the special architectural district system. It is meaningful to present priority considerations among qualitative evaluations by presenting the importance of evaluation items and to verify the necessity of differential application of evaluation items by operation procedure. In addition, it can be used as basic data for improving related systems and operational directions in the future.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• TABLE OF CONTENTS
• TABLE OF CONTENT ⅰ
• LIST OF TABLES ⅳ
• LIST OF FIGURES ⅷ
• ABSTRACT ⅹ
• Chapter 1. Introduction 1
• 1.1. Background and objective of the study 1
• 1.2. Scope and methods of the study 4
• Chapter 2. Examination of theories and previous studies 9
• 2.1. Theoretical study 9
• 2.1.1. Institutional study on special architectural districts 9
• 2.1.2. Publicity of urban planning and architecture 30
• 2.2. A review of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) 35
• 2.3. Analysis of prior research and differentiation of study 38
• Chapter 3. Framework of analysis 46
• 3.1. Analysis method and procedure 46
• 3.2. Derivation of evaluation items 48
• 3.2.1. Analysis of special architectural district operation guidelines 48
• 3.2.2. Analysis of evaluation indicators of previous studies related to publicity 61
• 3.2.3. Analysis of evaluation indicators for design quality related prior studies 66
• 3.2.4. Comprehensive analysis of evaluation indicators 69
• 3.3. Validation of suitability of evaluation items 72
• Chapter 4. Analysis of planning evaluation items through AHP analysis 80
• 4.1. Analysis outline 80
• 4.2. Importance and priority of each special architectural district evaluation item 82
• 4.2.1. Reliability analysis of survey results 82
• 4.2.2. The result of analyzing the importance of evaluation items for the upper and middle classes 83
• 4.2.3. Importance analysis of evaluation items for the lower class 88
• 4.2.4. Comprehensive analysis of importance of evaluation items for special architectural district 93
• 4.3. Necessity of evaluation items for each operation procedure of a special architectural district 99
• 4.3.1. Analysis Outline 99
• 4.3.2. Results of the importance analysis of evaluation items by procedure 100
• Chapter 5. Review of the application of the evaluation system through case analysis 109
• 5.1. Analysis outline 109
• 5.1.1. Analysis method and target site 109
• 5.1.2. Evaluation criteria and evaluation method for each item 114
• 5.2. Analysis of special architectural district planning cases 115
• 5.2.1 Evaluation on securement of publicity 115
• 5.2.2 Design quality improvement evaluation 127
• 5.3. Sub-conclusion : Comprehensive analysis 150
• Chapter 6. Conclusion 164
• 6.1. Results and implications of study 164
• 6.2. Significance of the study and future research tasks 169
• REFERENCE 171
• APPENDIX A 179
• APPENDIX B 198
• ABSTRACT IN KOREAN 208

참고문헌 (Reference)

1. 「Better by Design」, Khan , Ayub, , 2009

2. 「Social Science Research Methodology」, Seoil Chae, , 2016

3. 「Life Between Buildings : Using Public Space」, Jan Gehl, , 2011

4. 「The UK 's Public Design Policy and Implications, Jeonghoo Kim, No . 320 , pp . 108-119 ., , 2008

5. 「Publicity of Architecture and the Role of Urban Architects」, Jeong Seok, , 1997

6. 「A Study on Designation and Management of Special Building Zones」, Ilyong Byun, , 2016

7. 「Operation Guidelines for Designation of Bucheon City Special Building Zones」, Bucheon City, , 2019

8. environment green collection of writings and land issues for the four paradigm 」vol, Jeongjeon Lee, 69 - 105 43 , pp, , 2005

9. 「A Comparative Analysis and Improvement Plan of Apartment Houses Designated as Special Architectural District」, Hyunsoon Choi, , 2019

10. 「Publicity : Concept , History , Issues , Hwanghae Cultural Control」 No . 84 , Saeol Cultural Foundation pp.8-27, Sehoon Go, , 2014

11. 「Study on spatial structure model and institutional improvement for realization of urbanity of residential complex」, Jiyoung Ha, , 2012

12. 「Research on the Promotion of Public Interest in Public Planning : Related to Public Regulation of Urban Planning and Design」, Younghwan Kim, Volume 1, , 1995