지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Conventionaly the goal of a public project is defined as the level of achievement of publicness. In order to identify and evaluate validity of publicness, we have to check the true nature and operation of the project. For this purpose the author introduces a standard composed of three issues: rationality of program, homeostasis of form and facility, and fundamentality of sustainable characteristic. the level of achievement of publicness was identified on two projects performed by Seoul City Authority: Consolidation of Gwanghwamun Plaza, Attachment of New City Hall Building. The standard was helpful to evaluate.
The results could be synthesized as next following.
Feasibility study and program of the project was conducted in due process of law and regulation. But contents of feasibility study were somehow distorted inducing result of the project fail to suffice the original purpose, and misguided the design work itself.
As the scenario on the use of project facility were not fully invoved, the programs was insufficient to ask real, essential and indigenous needs. The results of these brought about images lacking as the symbol, and confusion on the maintenance, management of using, and high expenditure.
In conclusion, achievements of publicness as the public projects were insufficient and were much rooms for improvement.
Public institutions and organizations are main role player of public projects and require the advice and evaluation from the outside experts. The outside experts participate in feasibilty study, programming, design examination and technical advice must expend their effort in order to secure the publicness.
In conclusion, we suggest next followings: Feasibility study must be in real-name process; Policy decision maker, working public officials, evaluation outside experts must share responsibility in concrete and specific form; Especially college professors, the prominent role player as outside experts, reguliary invited in the procedure of projects, must share responsibility in the processes and results of the project and should perform as cooperator and overwatcher. Especially as design reviewer and critic, they must to check the contents of the program and its reflection to the design itself.
The results could be synthesized as next following.
Feasibility study and program of the project was conducted in due process of law and regulation. But contents of feasibility study were somehow distorted inducing result of the project fail to suffice the original purpose, and misguided the design work itself.
As the scenario on the use of project facility were not fully invoved, the programs was insufficient to ask real, essential and indigenous needs. The results of these brought about images lacking as the symbol, and confusion on the maintenance, management of using, and high expenditure.
In conclusion, achievements of publicness as the public projects were insufficient and were much rooms for improvement.
Public institutions and organizations are main role player of public projects and require the advice and evaluation from the outside experts. The outside experts participate in feasibilty study, programming, design examination and technical advice must expend their effort in order to secure the publicness.
In conclusion, we suggest next followings: Feasibility study must be in real-name process; Policy decision maker, working public officials, evaluation outside experts must share responsibility in concrete and specific form; Especially college professors, the prominent role player as outside experts, reguliary invited in the procedure of projects, must share responsibility in the processes and results of the project and should perform as cooperator and overwatcher. Especially as design reviewer and critic, they must to check the contents of the program and its reflection to the design itself.
목차
1. 서론
2. 서울시 광화문광장 조성의 경우
3. 서울시 시청사 증개축의 경우
4. 종합 및 제언
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2014-500-002925366