Zhang Chaohui

Keywords： City Renewal; Institutional System; Japan; Urban Regeneration; Location Optimization Plan

Abstract：

Urban renewal is an important strategy to improve the quality of urban human settlements and promote high-quality urban development. At present, the practices and explorations led by the transformation of old residential areas have been widely carried out. In order to better deal with various plannings and designs, interest coordination and other complex urban renewal problems, and ensure that the actions of urban renewal have basis, incentive and guarantee, the construction of urban renewal system is imperative. Japan has experienced nearly 20 years of urban regeneration development process, and has formed a set of urban renewal system with strong reference significance. Based on this, this paper combs the evolution of the system, subject and practice of urban regeneration in Japan, analyzes three main system modules and detailed practice mode of urban regeneration in Japan, and discusses the enlightenment of Japan’s urban regeneration system to China. Japan’s experience shows that the key reasons for the high-quality effect of urban renewal practice are the system construction and application based on integrity, dynamic, refinement and humanism, highly supporting policy guidance, and the operation mode of multi-agent full connection. It also enlightens that China should actively build the overall system framework of urban renewal in the future, and explore the “sub detailed” urban renewal mode. We should open up the path of “regional special case + commercialization” for urban renewal in China, and carefully consider the impact of the particularity of China’s urban scale, autonomy and regulation, and people’s interests on the construction of desirable system.

Funds：

• [1] 王丰龙, 刘云刚, 陈倩敏, 等. 范式沉浮——百年来西方城市规划理论体系的建构[J]. 国际城市规划, 2012, 27(1): 75-83.

  [2] CULLINGWORTH B, CAVES R W, CULLINGWORTH J B, et al.

  Planning in the USA: Policies, issues, and processes[M]. Routledge, 2013.

  [3] 于洋. 纽约市区划条例的百年流变（1916—2016）——以私有公共空间建设为例[J]. 国际城市规划, 2016, 31(2): 98-109.

  [4] FLUCK T A. Euclid v. Ambler: a retrospective[J]. Journal of the American Planning Association, 1986, 52(3): 326-337.

  [5] 薄力之. 美国区划法对于建设强度管控的措施与经验——以纽约为例[J]. 北京规划建设, 2017, 173(2): 34-43.

  [6] 孙骅声, 蔡建辉. 美国纽约市区划决议（1993 年修订本）的几个特点[J]. 国外城市规划, 1998(4): 41-42.

  [7] 王卉, 谭纵波, 刘健. 美国纽约市建筑高度控制方法探析[J]. 国际城市规划, 2016(1): 93-99.

  [8] 李强, 王珊. 纽约的分区制及其启示[J]. 城市规划学刊, 2005(5): 95-97.

  [9] 彭飞飞. 美国的城市区划法[J]. 国际城市规划, 2009, 24( 增刊1): 69-72.

  [10] 阳建强. 美国区划技术的发展（上）[J]. 城市规划, 1992(6): 49-52.

  [11] WEISS M A,WARD D, ZUNZ O. Density and intervention: New York’s planning traditions[M] // The landscape of modernity: essays on New York City, 1900-1940. Russell Sage Foundation, 1992: 46-75.

  [12] KOLNICK K A. Order before zoning: land use regulation in Los Angeles, 1880-1915[M]. University of Southern California, 2008.

  [13] WEISS M A. The rise of the community builders: the American real estate industry and urban land planning[M]. Beard Books, 2002.

  [14] FISCHLER R. The metropolitan dimension of early zoning: revisiting the 1916 New York City Ordinance[J]. Journal of the American Planning Association, 1998, 64(2): 170-188.

  [15] 李恒. 美国区划发展历史研究[D]. 北京: 清华大学, 2007.

  [16] HIRT S A. Zoned in the USA: the origins and implications of American land-use regulation[M]. Cornell University Press, 2015.

  [17] 王卉. 妨害视角下的城市土地用途控制探析——以美国为例[J]. 国际城市规划, 2015, 30( 增刊1): 23-28.

  [18] WHITTEMORE A. The regulated city: the politics of land use regulation in Los Angeles, 1909-2009[M]. University of California, Los Angeles, 2010.

  [19] BASSETT E M. Zoning: the laws, administration, and court decisions during the first twenty years[M]. Russell Sage Foundation, 1940.

  [20] 周剑云, 黎淑翎, 戚冬瑾, 等.《 1961 纽约区划则例》立法目的及其实施路线[J]. 城市规划, 2020, 44(10): 102-113.

  [21] WHITTEMORE A H. Zoning Los Angeles: a brief history of four regimes[J]. Planning perspectives, 2012, 27(3): 393-415.

  [22] 戚冬瑾, 周剑云. 基于形态的条例——美国区划改革新趋势的启示[J]. 城市规划, 2013, 37(9): 67-75.

  [23] BURDETTE J T. Form-based codes: a cure for the cancer called Euclidean Zoning?[D]. Blacksburg, Virginia: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 2004.

  [24] McDOUGAL III L L. Performance standards: a viable alternative to Euclidean zoning[J]. Tulane law review, 1972, 47: 255.

  [25] 黄明华, 赵阳, 高靖葆, 等. 规划与规则——对控制性详细规划发展方向的探讨[J]. 城市规划, 2020, 44(11): 52-57, 87.

  [26] 周剑云, 戚冬瑾. 从规划语言学层面再认识城市用地分类体系[J]. 城市规划, 2018, 42(10): 34-41.

  [27] 陈璐, 周剑云. 语言学视角下的规划、分区及分区代码研究[J/OL]. 城市规划, 2022[2022-04-24]. https://kns-cnki-net.webvpn.scut.edu.cn/kcms/detail/11.2378.TU.20220421.1203.002.html.