R E F E R E N C E
논문집–계획계 27권, 7호: 87-95.
이희연. 2008. 도시성장관리를 위한 기성시가지의 개발용량 분석. 한국도시지리학회지 11권 1호: 1-18.
임유경, 임현성. 2012. 근린 재생을 위한 도시 내 유휴공간 활용 정책방안 연구.
경기: 안양: 건축도시공간연구소. 기본 2012-3.
BBSR. 2013.
Innenentwicklungspotenziale in Deutschland.
Bundesinstitut für Bau-, S.-u. R. (2013). Bonn: Bundesinstitut für Bau-, Stadt- und Raumforschung(BBSR).Blanchard, Chris et al. 2008.
The Consequences of Residential Infill Development on Existing Neighborhoods in the Treasure Valley: a Study and Conclusions
. Idaho: Urban Land Institute Idaho and Idaho Smart Growth.Borough Council of King’s Lynn & West Norfolk. 2015. Sustainability Appraisal Report Incorporating Strategic Environmental Assessment for the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies.
http://consult.west-norfolk.gov.uk/portal/sadmpd/site_allocations_and_dev elopment_management_policies?pointId=2836013 (accessed May 25, 2015).
Bromsgrove District Council. 2014.
Beoley Conservation Area Draft Character Appraisal and Management Plan.
Bromsgrove: Bromsgrove District Council.Burchell, Robert W. et al. 2000.
Smart Growth: More than a Ghost of Urban Policy Past, Less Than a Bold New Horizon.
Housing Policy Debate 11, no. 4: 821-879.Charles, Suzanne L. 2011. Suburban Gentrification: Understanding the Determinants of Single-family Residential Redevelopment, A Case Study of the Inner-Ring Suburbs of Chicago, IL, 2000-2010.
Joint Center for Housing Studies Harvard University
. W11-1.City of Hagerstown. 2010. The 2008 Comprehensive Plan.
http://www.hagerstownmd.org/index.aspx?NID=298. (accessed May 23, 2015).
Cooper, Mary H. 2004. Can Managed Growth Reduce Sprawl?
Congressional Quarterly Researcher
14, no.20: 469-492.City and County of Swansea. 2013.
Infill and Backland Design Guide.
Swansea:City and County of Swansea
City of Lakewood. 2009.
Vacant and Under-Utilized Land Report.
Lakewood: City of Lakewood.Dale, Brady. 2013. Chicago's Land Bank Will Use Big Data to Target Vacant Homes.
Next City, 23 July 2013.
Department for Communities and Local Government. 2012.
National Planning Policy Framework.
London: Department for Communities and Local Government.Duany, Andrés. 2002. Introduction to the Special Issue: The Transect,
Journal of Urban Design
, 7, no.3: 251-260.Dye, Richard F. and Daniel P. M. 2007. Teardowns and land values in the Chicago metropolitan area.
Journal of Urban Economics
61, no.1: 45-63.Ellman, Tara. 1997.
Infill: The Cure for Sprawl?
Arizona: Goldwater Institute. Issue Analysis 146.Evans, Alan W. 2008. Economics and Land Use Planning.
Blackwell Publishing Ltd,
25 February, 2008.Farris, Terrence J. 2001. The Barriers to Using Urban Infill Development to Achieve Smart Growth.
Housing Policy Debate
12, issue.1: 1-30.Judd, D.R., and T. Swanstrom. 2006. City Politics: The Political Economy of Urban America, 5th ed. New York: Pearson/Longman.
Kamal, Azza. 2014. Suitability for Infill Development: A multi-criteria and Spatial Assessment Approach. In
Proceedings of the EAAE-ARCC 2014 International Architectural Research Conference
, February 12-15 2014. Manoa, HI.Kahn, Matthew. 2014. The Economics of Vacant Lots in Big Cities. Environmental and Urban Economics. 26 September.
Knowsley Council. 2012.
Knowsley Core Strategy: Green Belt Broad Locations for Development.
Knowsley: Sustainability Appraisal Report.Lancaster City Council. 2014.
Cannon Hill Conservation Area Appraisal.
Lancaster:Lancaster City Council.
Landis, John D. et al. 2006. The future of infill housing in California: Opportunities, potential, and feasibility.
Housing Policy Debate
17, no.1: 681-725.Maddala, G. S. 1983. Limited Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics,
New York: Cambridge University Press.
257-291.Metro Council. 2009.
Appendix 9: Residential “economic refill” study: 2001 to 2006.
Portland: 2009 - 2030 urban growth report. A9.McConnell, Virginia and Wiley, K. 2010. Infill Development: Perspectives and Evidence from Economics and Planning.
Resources for the Future,
RFF DP 10-13.Mori, Alison E. 2004. Vacant and underutilized land in Boston.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Thesis (S.M.).Myers, Dowell, and Alicia Kitsuse. 1999. The Debate Over Future Density of Development: An Interpretive Review. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
Northeast Midwest Institute. 2001.
Strategies for Successful Infill Development.
Washington, DC: Northeast-Midwest Institute Congress for New Urbanism.
OECD. 2013.
OECD Regions at a Glance 2013.
Paris: OECD. Statistics 5 December 2013.Preuß, Thomas and Verbücheln M. (eds). 2013.
Towards Circular Flow Land Use Management.
Berlin: The CircUse Compendium.Robinson and Cole LLP. 2002.
Best Practices to Encourage Infill Development.
Washington, DC: National Association of Realtors.
Sandoval, Juan O. and Landis, J. 2000.
Estimating the housing infill capacity of
the Bay Area
. California: Institute of Urban and Regional Development. WorkingPaper 2000-06.
Solimar Research Group. http://www.solimar.org. (accessed April 10, 2015).
Steinacker, Annette. 2003. Infill Development And Affordable Housing.
Urban Affairs Review
38, no.4: 492 –509.Virginia. M. and Wiley K. 2010. Infill Development: Perspectives and Evidence from Economics and Planning. Resources for the Future.
http://www.rff.org/News/Features/Pages/Infill-Development-Perspectives-and-Evidence-from-Economics-and-Planning.aspx.
Whatcom County. 2015. Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan.
http://www.whatcomcounty.us/1171/Current-Comprehensive-Plan.
(accessed May 20, 2015).
Wheeler, Stephen. 2001.
Smart Infill.
San Francisco: Greenbelt Alliance.Wiley, Keith. 2007. An Exploration of the Impact of Suburban In-Fill: Is Perception Reality? Paper presented at
Smart Growth 10 Conference,
October 3-5. College Park, Maryland.Young, Dwight. 1995.
Alternatives to Sprawl (Policy Focus Report).
Massachusetts : Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. PF004.Keywords: underutilized land, infill development, urban planning, urban redevelopment, planning support system
Korea has experienced rapid urbanization as well while achieving rapid industrialization and economic development over the past decades. Existing cities have grown explosively as well as new cities have been supplied in a planned way. However, Korea has been entering a more stable growth phase since the 2000s; more explicit expansion of the small-scale and fragmented cities is underway and the interiors of the existing cities are aging and getting idle. Therefore, utilizing the idle space effectively and efficiently can be said to have a high value on national urban policies in terms of the compressed utilization of the existing urban space and contribution to the inhibition of explicit growth of cities; it will be necessary to find a systematic utilization of idle space (vacant and underutilized land) in order to manage national territorial space systematically and utilize effectively in the future.
Scientific research methods and tools are necessary for systematic utilization of vacant and underutilized land. This study was conducted with the purpose of developing a pilot model for analysis & assessment of the vacant and underutilized land as a scientific policy support measures (planning support systems) to systematically identify the idle space and to encourage infill developments. Recently, government ministries and municipalities are taking