立地適正化計画における地域拠点の位置づけ方針と都市構造に関する研究

中心施設と受け持つエリアの設定からみた24都市の分析

抄録

 In order to realize a sustainable urban structure, the Location Normalization Plan system was established as an advanced version of the urban planning master plan. Among them, many cities plan to designate “District centers " as a center to support the daily lives of citizens and to build a compact city by intensive urban structures where centers are networked by public transport.

 Such a plan has been made influenced by the concept of Compact City proposed in Western Europe, but the shape of the intensive urban structure unique to Japan and its planning theory are needed.

 The purpose of this research is to clarify the designation policy of the district centers from the designation of the central facilities of the district centers and the area to be covered in the location normalization plan by comparison with the urban planning master plan, and to clarify the features of the intensive urban structure that each city aims.

 Of the cities that formulate the Location Normalization Plan by December 31 2017, the target city to be surveyed in this research, targeted 24 cities in the regional cities with a population of 100,000 to 500,000.

 The conclusions obtained are as follows.

 1) The number of district centers to be set differs from city to city, but in many cases the functions of transportation, administration and commerce are set as the center of district centers, in particular the stations with traffic functions are the most frequently designated, accounting for 40% of the total . Administrative functions are designated in local cities with many branch offices, so many are located in urbanization control area and outside city planning area because it is the old office before the merger. Commercial function is not a single commercial facility, it is designated only in the use area and commercial concentration area..

 2) In the Location Normalization Plan, only 5 cities designate the district centers without changing those of the urban planning master plan.Cities within metropolitan areas tend to reduce district centers, local cities tend to add district centers, and some cities have added a number of district centers by introducing a new positioning policy.

 3) Most of the district centers are designated as urban function guidance zones, and urban structures aiming to consolidate urban functions at district centers are aimed. On the other hand, in local cities, many district centers are set in places where urban function guidance areas can not be set.

 4) Many cities do not designate areas covered by district centers, but on the other hand, more than half of the cities designate covered by them, many of which are set in the former administrative division.

 5) When we summarize the characteristics of urban structure for each city classification, in a city within a metropolitan area, the station is the central facility and the area covered is not often set, whereas in the local cities, the covered area is designated doubly and there is a tendency that it is set as a base of a community that is more familiar all over the city.

 District centers have diverse roles and are planning the placement of the centers by the policy of each local government.