抄録
In the reconstruction from the Great East Japan Earthquake, some of the damaged areas were prohibited to live in due to large damage from tsunami. Therefore it was difficult for victims to decide the way of housing reconstruction as soon as disaster occured. Each local government decided to provide several direct supports for victims: prepare the sites for group relocation on high ground, and build the public housing. On this occasion, government had to know needs of victims so that they can determine number of public housing they build. The grasp of the housing demands of victims was important as a basic data source, however, the data can be flexible and difficult to settle while victims can't judge if they are able to reconstruct on their pre-disaster living sites or not, in this early stage of recovery. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to clarify the constitution of the housing demands of the victims, who finally selected to live in the public housing after the disaster, using statistical analysis of questionnaire for victims and their re-registration data for public housing.
As a result, in around two years between the needs assessment of household's housing reconstruction plan and re-registration for moving in public housing, about 40 % of applicants changed their selection from the public housing to other options. The shift is related to the life style before the disaster and the living place after the disaster. Some applicants changed their choice from the new central area near a large shopping center to the district they lived before the disaster. It was related to two factors: the condition of pre-disaster living sites, wheather they are outside of uninhabitable zone; and the place of temporary living, wheather they could continue living in the pre-disaster living area during temporary living. Many households who selected to live in the public housing in seaside area lived there before the disaster. And in seaside areas, there's relationship between housing type and household type: young households selected detached houses and terrace houses, various type of households selected medium-height housing, and eldery households selected low-rise housing. In the historical central area of the city, on the other hand, various type of households selected low-rise housing and single-eldery households selected high-rise housing.
In conclusion, first, to determine the number of houses for government to build in the planning phase, it is necessary to consider life-style and ability of self-reconstruction, not only simply referring the result of needs of the victims without details. Second, because some victims finally selected to resettle in their pre-disaster living area, it seems possible to strategically recreate the damaged area by deploying public housing considering the future land use. Third, various plans of housing, e.g., housing for elderly, housing for living with pets, were proposed, but it also caused aggregation of socially similar families in some cases. The method of planning for the social mix is necessary. Otherwise, self-government with only elderlies can be collapsed sooner or later.
