:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:鄉村地區舊社區實現「在地老化」之住宅改造及參與式設計操作之可行性探討
書刊名:都市與計劃
作者:黃耀榮 引用關係
作者(外文):Hwang, Yao-rong
出版日期:2012
卷期:39:4
頁次:頁431-459
主題關鍵詞:鄉村地區參與式設計舊社區在地老化住宅改造CountrysideParticipatory designExisting communityAging in placeHousing refurnishing
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(3) 博士論文(1) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:3
  • 共同引用共同引用:65
  • 點閱點閱:65
住宅性能符合「在地老化」已是發展趨勢,考量照護設施與照顧人員操作空間需求,並改善居家環境能達到高齡者之行動安全與便利將是住宅必要需求,然而舊社區在無法更新的情況下,面對高齡者由獨立生活、協助式照顧到完全照護等階段,「在地老化」將面臨困境。因此,本研究針對舊社區之住宅進行促進「在地老化」功能之實驗性改造設計,並探討以社區為基礎之改造行動運用參與式設計操作之可行性。研究發現: (一)舊有住宅之支架體雖然受到無法改變之限制,但仍然可透過區帶分析找尋適用之模矩及發展適合之空間填充體,而達到「在地老化」之各階段生活空間之變遷需求。 (二)有關開放建築設計之應用,在傳統式平房或是連棟式透天厝均以拆合性、調適性之設計居多,延展性設計則較為困難。 (三)對於參與式設計之操作,社區長期參與事務之核心人物協助、社區居民具有共同之社區意識、和住戶溝通技術之運用、住戶之心態與認知等是影響操作可行性之主要因素。
Aging in place has been the developmental trend of housing performance. To consider the needs of caring facilities and the space for caregivers’ operations and to improve home environment reaching mobility safety and accessibility for the aged are requirements of housing. Nevertheless, communities have the problem of aging in place when the aged face independent living, assisted living and skilled-nursing phase because of the limitation of housing renew. Therefore, this research focused on housing in the existing community, and produced experimental housing refurnishing designs to improve the function of housing for aging in place. On the other hand, this research studied the possibility of using participatory designs in refurnishing on a community basis. The results show that although change in the structure of existing housing was limited, it was still possible to find adaptable modules and develop suitable infill through zoning analysis to match the changing requirements regarding living spaces during the different phases of aging in place. Regarding the application of open building design, assembly and adaption designs were easier than elasticity design, in both traditional court housing and row housing. Regarding the operation of participatory design, the assistance of key persons with long-term participation in community affairs, community residents have common notions, and communication with residents via multi-technique, as well as resident cognition and attitude were major influences on the operating possibilities.
期刊論文
1.黃瑞茂、羅文貞(20011200)。社區參與公共空間的營造--後竹圍公園的經驗研究。環境與藝術學刊,2,133-150。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.蘇景輝(19990900)。社區照顧實務探討。社區發展季刊,87,225-236。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.Arnstein, Sherry R.(1969)。A ladder of citizen participation。Journal of the American Institute of Planners,35(4),216-224。  new window
4.黃源協(20040900)。社區工作何去何從:社區發展?社區營造?。社區發展季刊,107,78-87。new window  延伸查詢new window
5.黃耀榮(20060200)。實現「在地老化」之終生住宅發展形式探討。臺灣老年醫學雜誌,1(3),138-150。  延伸查詢new window
研究報告
1.楊逸詠、蕭江碧、丁育群(2003)。建立住宅性能評估制度之研究。臺北:內政部建築研究所。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.鄭晃二(2002)。友善空間--創造對話的參與式營造。臺北市:田園城市文化。  延伸查詢new window
2.Hester, Randolph T.(1990)。Community design primer。Ridge Times Press。  new window
3.Wates, N.、Knevitt, C.(1987)。Community Architecture: How people are creating their own environment。London:Penguin,UK。  new window
4.Forester, John(1989)。Planning in the Face of Power。University of California Press。  new window
5.Denzin, Norman K.、Lincoln, Yvonna S.(1994)。Handbook of Qualitative Research。Sage。  new window
其他
1.內政部營建署(2006)。住宅狀況調查報告。  延伸查詢new window
2.張聖琳(1999)。造坊有理社區設計的夢想與實驗。  延伸查詢new window
3.陳政雄、王武烈(2007)。既有集合住宅無障礙設施改善研究。  延伸查詢new window
4.曾旭正、劉欣蓉、黃衍明(2002)。參與式社區設計技術手冊。  延伸查詢new window
5.曾思瑜(1997)。高齡者居家生活安全設計規範研究。  延伸查詢new window
6.黃耀榮(2004)。建構農村聚落居家照護環境設施之規畫研究--以雲林地區為例。  延伸查詢new window
7.黃耀榮(2008)。舊社區實現『在地老化』之公共設施和住宅改造之行動研究--『在地老化』之住宅改造需求調查。  延伸查詢new window
8.靳燕玲、華昌宜(2004)。住宅改善之居住調整行為初探。  延伸查詢new window
9.劉欣蓉(1997)。參與式設計與都市政治中的專業者:以淡水與芝山經驗為例。  延伸查詢new window
10.Eguchi, T., Schmidt, R., Dainty, A., Austin, S., and Gibb, A.(2011)。The cultivation of adaptability in Japan。  new window
11.Geraedts, R. B.(1998)。Open building and flexibility: An assessment method matching demand and supply for flexibility。  new window
12.Hamdi, N. and Goethert, R.(1999)。Action Planning for Cities: A Guide to Community Practice。  new window
13.Herlitz, C.(1997)。Distribution of informal and formal home help for elderly people in Sweden。  new window
14.Johnson, W. C.(1984)。Citizen participation in local planning in the UK and USA: A comparative study。  new window
15.Katan, Y. and Werczberger, E.(1997)。Housing for elderly people in Israel。  new window
16.Kendall, S.(1998)。Beyond programmatic functionalism: The prospects for open building。  new window
17.Kose, S.(1997)。Housing elderly people in Japan。  new window
18.Lindstrom, B.(1997)。Housing and service for the elderly in Denmark。  new window
19.Mahmood, A., Steggell, C., Yamamoto, T., and Lee, M.(2007)。Gerotechnology and aging in place: A conceptual model and preliminary finding from pilot projects。  new window
20.Oswald, F. and Wahl, H.W.(2007)。Aging in place research update: The role of perceived and objective housing in later life。  new window
21.Stringer, E.(1999)。Action Research。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE