과거 우리나라의 도시정책은 도시 내의 혼잡문제를 해결하고 주택난을 개선하기 위하여 신도시 개발을 진행하였고, 기성 시가지의 노후 주거지 문제를 해결하기 위하여 재개발, 재건축 등의 도시정비사업을 진행하였다. 그러나 저출산 ? 고령화로 인구 성장이 정체되며, 이러한 외곽개발 중심의 도시정책(Urban Policy)은 한계점에 도달하였다. 이러한 문제를 효율적으로 해결하기 위하여 정부는 인구의 감소, 산업구조의 변화, 도시의 무분별한 확장(Urban Sprawl), 주거환경의 노후화 등으로 쇠퇴(Decline)하는 지역들을 대상으로 지역 역량 강화, 새로운 기능의 도입·창출 등을 통하여 경제적·사회적·물리적·환경적으로 활성화시키는 도시재생 뉴딜사업을 시행하고 있다. 따라서 본 연구에서는 주거환경 취약지역을 대상으로 주거환경 개선을 목적으로 하는 도시재생 뉴딜사업의 유형 및 추진체계 분석과 대상 지역주민들의 적극적 의견수렴을 통하여 도시재생 뉴딜사업에 대한 문제점을 분석하고, 주거환경 취약지역을 대상으로 하는 도시재생 뉴딜사업의 유형별 개선방안을 제시하고자 한다. 분석방법으로는 일반근린형(S 사업지구), 주거지 지원형(K 사업지구), 우리동네 살리기(N 사업지구) 도시재생 뉴딜사업 3개소의 사업 대상지의 주민을대상으로 주민 생활 불편사항 및 필요 시설을 조사하여 빈도를 분석하였으며, 연령, 거주형태, 거주기간 등의 기본사항과 마을 생활환경 만족도를 조사하여 상기 기본사항이 마을 생활 만족도에 영향을 미치는 영향을 알아보기 위하여 일원 배치 분산분석(One-way ANOVA)을 실시하였다. 먼저 주민 생활에 대한 불편사항의 빈도분석 결과를 정리하면 S 사업지구와 K 사업지구에 대한 필요 시설은 동일하게 노후주택 정비와 주거환경 개선 및 주차장 확보 등이 최우선 순위로 나타났으며, N 사업지구의 경우 보행환경개선과 주거안전 취약, 도시가스 설치 등이 최우선 순위로 나타났다. 즉, 실질적 요구 시설은 생활환경과 관련된 노후주택, 주차시설, 보행로 등의 물리적 시설의 구축이며, 따라서 고령 인구가 많은 주거환경 취약지역의생활환경을 개선하기 위해서는 노후주택의 개량 및 생활 필요 시설의 확보가 가장 중요하게 요구되는 것으로 나타났다. 다음으로 일원 배치 분산분석결과를 정리하면 3개 사업지구의 유의수준은거주형태별 유의수준이 S 사업지구 0.000***, K 사업지구 0.000***, N 사업지구0.01***로 나타나고 있어 귀무가설 기각, 대립가설이 채택되어 3개의 사업지구모두‘적어도 거주형태별 두 집단 간에는 마을만족도 점수 차이가 있다’고 할 수 있다. 그러나 연령별 유의수준 및 거주기간별 유의수준은 모두 0.05이상으로 나타나 크게 유의하지 않은 것으로 나타났으며, 이는 단독주택, 빌라, 다세대주택, 아파트 등 거주형태에 따라 마을만족도에 차이가 있다고 볼수 있다. 따라서 주거취약지역의 도시재생 뉴딜사업을 효율적으로 진행하기위해 거주자의 거주형태에 따라 사업의 차등화가 이루어질 필요가 있다. 이상의 분석결과를 바탕으로 주거취약지역 도시재생 뉴딜사업의 실태분석에 따른 다음과 같은 개선방안을 제시하였다. 첫째, 사업지역을 효율적으로 선정하고 실제로 매우 열악한 지역을 개선하기 위해서는 모든 지역에 동일하게 적용되고 있는 법정쇠퇴기준을 사업유형과 지역별 특성에 따라 유연하게 적용하도록 하여야 한다. 둘째, 지역 자산을 적극적으로 활용한 도시재생 뉴딜사업 시행을 통하여지역 재생에 대한 사회 가치에 중점을 두는 전문가 집단 육성 및 지역 자산의 적극적 활용이 가능한 지역주민을 발굴할 수 있는 사업계획이 필요하다. 셋째, 단기적이고 소규모의 정부 재원 지원만으로는 주거취약지역의 도시재생 뉴딜사업을 모두 추진하기에는 무리가 있다. 이를 개선하기 위해서는수익형 사업과 비(非) 수익형 사업이 필요한 지역을 명확하게 구분하고 이를 반영하여 수익형 사업에는 사업채무보증, 부동산금융 등 다양한 금융기법을활용하고 비 수익형 사업에는 정부의 보조금 및 재정지원 등의 기법을 적용 하도록 하여야 할 것이다. 넷째, 도시재생을 전담할 수 있는 기관을 새로 설립하여야 한다. 해당 기관은 민간과 지방 공공단체 협력을 지원할 수 있어야 하며, 기반시설설치및 주거환경 정비 등의 다양한 사업을 주도적으로 시행하여야 한다. 또한,도시재생 뉴딜사업의 지속성을 확보하고 이를 유지·관리하여 장기적인 도시재생 뉴딜사업을 구축할 수 있도록 하여야 한다. 다섯째, 현재 국내 도시재생 뉴딜사업이 주민들의 의견을 적극적으로 수용하여 사업을 진행하기 위해서는 사업의 장기화 방안 도출이 매우 중요하다. 국내 도시재생 뉴딜사업은 국가 주도의 단기적 도시재생이 이루어지고있으며 이는 주민 의견을 충분히 수렴한 계획을 도출할 수 없고 소외되는주민 또한 발생할 가능성이 높다. 이를 개선하기 위해서는 도시재생 뉴딜사업의 사업 기간은 10년 이상의 장기계획으로 계획될 수 있도록 하며 주민의견수렴 기간을 최대한으로 늘려서 계획을 수립하도록 하여 장기적인 발전계획을 수립하여야 한다. 여섯째, 도시재생 뉴딜사업의 지속가능성을 확보하기 위해서는 도시재생뉴딜사업을 이끌어 갈 수 있는 도시재생 기업의 육성이 필요하다. 현재 도시재생 뉴딜사업은 공공재원의 지원으로 운영되며, 공공 개입이 중단되면 도시재생 뉴딜사업의 운영이 종료되는 실정이다. 그러므로 사업의 지속성을 위해서는 해당 사업을 지속적으로 견인할 수 있는 기업을 육성해야 한다. 이상으로 분석을 토대로 주거환경 취약지역의 도시재생 뉴딜사업의 실태분석과 개선방안에 대해서 도출하였다. 그러나 연구를 진행하면서 대상지를특정 지역으로만 한정하여 선정했다는 점에서 연구의 한계점이라고 할 수있으며, 향후 주거취약지역의 도시재생 뉴딜사업에 대해서 심층적이고 체계적인 연구 및 지속적인 관리방안에 대한 연구가 진행되어야 할 것이다.
In the past, urban policies in Korea conducted new city development to solve the congestion problem in the city and to improve housing shortages, and urban improvement projects such as redevelopment and reconstruction were carried out to solve the problem of old residential areas in old cities. But low birth rate ? Population growth is stagnating due to aging, and urban policies centered on outlying development have reached their limit. In order to solve these problems efficiently, the government aims to strengthen regional competencies in areas that are declining due to a decrease in population, changes in industrial structure, urban sprawl, and deterioration of residential environments. Through introduction and creation, we are implementing the Urban Regeneration New Deal project that activates economically, socially, physically and environmentally. Therefore, this study analyzes the problems of the urban renewal New Deal project through the analysis of the type and implementation system of the urban renewal New Deal project aimed at improving the residential environment in the residential environment vulnerable areas, and actively collecting opinions from residents of the project district. It is intended to present improvement plans for each type of urban renewal new deal targeting vulnerable areas. Analysis methods include general neighborhood type (S project district), residential area support type (K project district), and our neighborhood saving (N project district). The facility was investigated to analyze the frequency, and basic matters such as age, type of residence, and duration of residence were investigated and the satisfaction of the village life environment was investigated to determine the effect of the above basic items on the satisfaction of village life. One-way ANOVA was carried out. First of all, if we summarize the results of the frequency analysis of residents'' inconveniences and inconveniences, the necessary facilities in project S and K districts have the same priority as renovating old houses, improving residential environment, and securing parking lots. In the case, improvement of the pedestrian environment, weak residential safety, and installation of city gas were the top priorities. In other words, the actual required facilities are the construction of physical facilities such as old houses, parking facilities, and pedestrian paths related to the living environment. Therefore, in order to improve the living environment in vulnerable areas of the residential environment with a large number of elderly populations, It turns out that securing is the most important requirement. Next, when the analysis results of the One-way ANOVA are summarized, the significance level of the three business districts by residence type is 0.000*** for S districts, 0.000*** for K business districts, and 0.01* for N districts. Since the null hypothesis was rejected and the alternative hypothesis was adopted, it can be said that there is at least a difference in village satisfaction score between the two groups by type of residence''. However, the significance level for each age and the significance level for each residence period were both above 0.05, indicating that they were not significantly significant. This can be seen as a difference in village satisfaction according to the type of residence such as detached houses, villas, multi-family houses, and apartments. Therefore, in order to efficiently carry out the Urban Renewal New Deal project in vulnerable residential areas, it is judged that the business should be differentiated according to the type of residence of the residents. Based on the above analysis results, the following improvement measures were suggested according to the actual condition analysis of the urban regeneration new deal in residential vulnerable areas. First, in order to efficiently select business areas and improve areas that are actually very poor, the legal decline standards, which are applied equally to all areas, must be flexibly applied according to the business type and regional characteristics. Second, it is necessary to develop a group of experts who focus on the social value of local regeneration through the implementation of the Urban Regeneration New Deal project that actively utilizes local assets, and a business plan to discover local residents who can actively utilize local assets. Third, it is difficult to carry out all the urban renewal new deal projects in residential vulnerable areas with only short-term and small-scale government funding. In order to improve this, the regions in which profitable and non-profitable businesses are needed are clearly classified and reflected, and various financial techniques such as business debt guarantee and real estate finance are used for profit-oriented businesses, and government subsidies and financial support for non-profitable businesses. You will have to apply the technique of Fourth, it is necessary to establish a new institution dedicated to urban regeneration. The agency should be able to support cooperation between the private sector and local public organizations, and should take the lead in various projects such as infrastructure installation and residential environment improvement. In addition, the sustainability of the urban renewal new deal project should be secured and maintained and managed so that a long-term urban renewal new deal project can be established. Fifth, in order for the current domestic urban renewal new deal to actively accept the opinions of residents and proceed with the projects, it is very important to derive a plan for prolonging the project. In the domestic urban renewal New Deal, the state-led short-term urban renewal is taking place, and it is highly probable that a plan that sufficiently gathers the opinions of residents cannot be drawn up, and there is a high possibility that alienated residents will also occur. To improve this, the project period of the Urban Renewal New Deal project should be planned with a long-term plan of 10 years or more, and a long-term development plan should be established by planning to significantly increase the period for collecting opinions from residents. Sixth, in order to secure the sustainability of the urban renewal new deal, it is necessary to foster urban renewal companies that can lead the urban renewal new deal. Currently, the Urban Regeneration New Deal Project is operated with the support of public resources, and if public intervention is stopped, the operation of the Urban Renewal New Deal project is terminated. Therefore, in order for the Urban Renewal New Deal project to be sustainable, it is necessary to foster companies that can continuously lead the project. Based on the above analysis, the actual condition analysis and improvement plan of the urban renewal new deal project in the residential environment vulnerable areas were derived. However, it can be said that it is a limitation of the study in that the target area was selected only in a specific area during the research process. In the future, an in-depth and systematic study on the urban renewal New Deal project in residential vulnerable areas and a study on a continuous management plan should proceed. something to do.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론 ···························································································· 11. 연구의 배경 및 목적 ····································································· 12. 연구의 범위 및 방법 ····································································· 21) 연구의 범위 ····························································································· 22) 연구의 방법 ····························································································· 2Ⅱ. 이론적 고찰 ·············································································· 41. 용어의 정리 ····················································································· 41) 취약지역의 개념 ····················································································· 42) 도시재생 뉴딜사업의 개념 ··································································· 53) 도시정책의 흐름 ····················································································· 74) 도시재생 뉴딜사업의 유형 ··································································· 92. 선행연구 고찰 ··············································································· 131) 주거환경 취약지역에 관한 연구 ······················································· 132) 도시재생 뉴딜사업에 관한 연구 ······················································· 153. 연구주제의 차별성 ······································································· 17Ⅲ. 주거환경 취약지역 도시재생 뉴딜사업의 추진현황 ······ 181. 도시재생 뉴딜사업 추진현황 ····················································· 181) 유형별 도시재생 뉴딜사업 추진현황 ················································ 182) 주거환경 취약지역 도시재생 뉴딜사업 추진현황 ························· 192. 대상지 선정 및 도시쇠퇴진단 ··················································· 201) 주거환경 취약지역 대상지 선정 ······················································· 202) 부산광역시 주거환경 취약지역 도시쇠퇴진단 ······························· 293. 부산광역시 주거환경 취약지역 도시재생 뉴딜사업 추진현황··· 311) 부산광역시 도시재생 뉴딜사업 추진현황 ······································ 312) S 사업지구 일반근린형 도시재생 뉴딜사업 ··································· 323) K 사업지구 주거지지원형 도시재생 뉴딜사업 ······························ 394) N 사업지구 우리 동네 살리기 도시재생 뉴딜사업 ······················ 45Ⅵ. 주거환경 취약지역 도시재생 뉴딜사업의 실태분석 ······ 511. 일반근린형 도시재생 뉴딜사업 설문 조사 및 분석 ············· 511) 설문 조사개요 ······················································································· 512) 응답자 특성 및 빈도분석 ··································································· 523) 마을 생활환경 만족도 조사 ······························································· 534) 문제점 및 개선방안에 관한 사항 ····················································· 545) 일원 배치 분산분석 ············································································· 552. 주거지지원형 도시재생 뉴딜사업 설문 조사 및 분석 ········· 581) 설문 조사개요 ······················································································· 582) 응답자 특성 및 빈도분석 ··································································· 583) 마을 생활환경 만족도 조사 ······························································· 604) 문제점 및 개선방안에 관한 사항 ····················································· 615) 일원 배치 분산분석 ············································································· 623. 우리 동네 살리기 도시재생 뉴딜사업 설문 조사 및 분석 651) 설문 조사개요 ······················································································· 652) 응답자 특성 및 빈도분석 ··································································· 653) 마을 생활환경 만족도 조사 ······························································· 674) 문제점 및 개선방안에 관한 사항 ····················································· 685) 일원 배치 분산분석 ············································································· 684. 주민 필요 시설 분석결과 ··························································· 711) 불편사항 및 필요 시설 빈도분석 결과 ··········································· 712) 일원 배치 분산분석 결과 ··································································· 72Ⅴ. 주거환경 취약지역 도시재생 뉴딜사업의 문제점 및 개선방안·· 731. 취약지역 도시재생 뉴딜사업의 유형별 문제점 ····················· 731) 정책 방향 문제점 ················································································· 732) 사회·경제 부분의 문제점 ································································· 743) 도시재생 뉴딜 사업상의 문제점 ······················································· 752. 취약지역 도시재생 뉴딜사업의 유형별 개선방안 ················· 761) 정책 방향 개선방안 ············································································· 762) 사회·경제 부분의 개선방안 ····························································· 773) 도시재생 뉴딜 사업상의 개선방안 ··················································· 78Ⅵ. 결론 ·························································································· 79□ 참고문헌□ Abstract□ 부록