{"created":"2023-06-19T12:45:49.082904+00:00","id":5672,"links":{},"metadata":{"_buckets":{"deposit":"a960c7a6-a2c5-404c-a170-3baa5ac9556a"},"_deposit":{"created_by":3,"id":"5672","owners":[3],"pid":{"revision_id":0,"type":"depid","value":"5672"},"status":"published"},"_oai":{"id":"oai:tokyo-metro-u.repo.nii.ac.jp:00005672","sets":["521:613:616:763:1328"]},"author_link":["18798","18799"],"item_3_alternative_title_19":{"attribute_name":"その他のタイトル","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_alternative_title":"Community Agreements : Its Theory and Practices"}]},"item_3_biblio_info_7":{"attribute_name":"書誌情報","attribute_value_mlt":[{"bibliographicIssueDates":{"bibliographicIssueDate":"1998","bibliographicIssueDateType":"Issued"},"bibliographicPageEnd":"84","bibliographicPageStart":"69","bibliographicVolumeNumber":"65","bibliographic_titles":[{"bibliographic_title":"総合都市研究"}]}]},"item_3_creator_3":{"attribute_name":"著者別名","attribute_type":"creator","attribute_value_mlt":[{"creatorNames":[{"creatorName":"Nakai, Norihiro"}],"nameIdentifiers":[{"nameIdentifier":"18799","nameIdentifierScheme":"WEKO"}]}]},"item_3_description_4":{"attribute_name":"抄録","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_description":"本研究は、近年締結例が増加しており、柔軟で機動的に地域の様々なルールと定めたものとして注目されつつあるまちづくり協定制度に対して、まず理論的な類型を提示し、次に筆者らが行った調査をもとに、商店街と住宅地という2つの地域における既存まちづくり協定の規定内容の分析結果を踏まえた上で、都市計画、特に土地利用規制制度との関わりでまちづくり協定の位置付けと役割を考察しようとするものである。研究では、まずまちづくり協定の定義を行い、次いで、制度としてのまちづくり協定を分類する方法として、法的位置づけと締結形式に着目し、それぞれが法的正当性、公的関与の程度を示すものであることを議論した上で、計16種類の類型を提示した。さらに調査から得られた商店街と住宅地のまちづくり協定計91件の分析結果から、まちづくり協定の規定内容は、①建築用途・形態関係、②意匠などの建築デザイン関係、③維持管理・コミュニティ活動関係の3つに大きくは分類され、これらの組み合わせによって、「街路整備型」「景観・コミュニティ活動重視型」「ソフト特化型」「総合環境整備型」の4つのパターンが存在することを明らかにした。また、①建築用途・形態関係は、現行用途地域制に対する上乗せ規制として、「暫定地区計画」「暫定建築協定」的な性格を有し、②意匠などの建築デザイン関係は、地区計画・建築協定に対する補完的な役割(横出し)と位置づけられるのに対して、③維持管理・コミュニティ活動関係は、「コミュニティの生活ルール」的な内容をもつものと解釈されることを議論している。最後に、提示されたまちづくり協定制度の16の類型に対して、「公的規制」「公的指導」「私的契約」「私的調整」の4つの性格を傾向づけ、さらにこれらの性格づけを利用しながら、まちづくり協定の規定内容と協定制度類型との関係、協定の実効性担保方法と協定制度類型との関係を考察している。その結果、公的規制の傾向を有するまちづくり協定制度ではポリスパワーによる規制が、私的調整の傾向を有する協定制度では民間まちづくり組織による管理が、その中間的な傾向の協定制度では行政指導が実効性担保の主たる手段として考えられることを１つの仮説として提示している。","subitem_description_type":"Abstract"},{"subitem_description":"“Machizukuri\" agreements, or community agreements, which define agreed rules between interested residents, have become increasingly a popular tool for the improvements of community environment. The purpose of this paper is to show a framework for a theoretical analysis of community agreements, and by using this framework to consider the roles and status of these agreements in relation to normal planning controls. The discussion begins with the definition of community agreements, followed by an examination of two concepts by which the community agreement systems can be classified: the legal status and the public involvement. The legal status of community agreements varies, from absolute non-statutory to defined by municipality ordinances, or national laws. The degree of public involvement also shows a diversity, from those interpreted as purely private-private relation to those into which the municipality actually enters. Our analysis consequently proposes 16 categories for the classification of various community agreement systems. An empirical examination of 91 agreements reveals that various rules defined in the community agreements can be divided into three groups. The first group relates to the improvements of physical environments and can therefore be considered as interim district planning controls. The second group emphasizes design and landscape controls, such as advertisement controls and aesthetic controls, so that it can be regarded as the complementary to normal planning control. The third and last group mainly defines rules for the non-physical aspects of the community, such as opening hours and events in the case of shopping districts, or street maintenance in the case of residential areas. The final chapter attempts to consider the characteristics of various community agreement Systems, by combining the theoretical framework with the results of the empirical analysis. It is discussed that basically the community agreements could be characterized by one of the following four features: formal public regulation, informal public guidance, formal private contract, and informal private arrangement. The paper ends with a discussion as to how these agreements can be effectively implemented. It is suggested that while controls by local governments based on police power could be effective for those agreements with formal public regulation character, to strengthen the management ability of private community organization would be desirable for those with informal private arrangement character. ","subitem_description_type":"Abstract"}]},"item_3_description_40":{"attribute_name":"資源タイプ","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_description":"postprint","subitem_description_type":"Other"}]},"item_3_publisher_33":{"attribute_name":"出版者","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_publisher":"東京都立大学都市研究センター"}]},"item_3_source_id_10":{"attribute_name":"書誌レコードID","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_source_identifier":"AN00134354","subitem_source_identifier_type":"NCID"}]},"item_3_source_id_8":{"attribute_name":"ISSN","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_source_identifier":"03863506","subitem_source_identifier_type":"ISSN"}]},"item_3_version_type_16":{"attribute_name":"著者版フラグ","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_version_resource":"http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85","subitem_version_type":"VoR"}]},"item_creator":{"attribute_name":"著者","attribute_type":"creator","attribute_value_mlt":[{"creatorNames":[{"creatorName":"中井, 検裕"}],"nameIdentifiers":[{}]}]},"item_files":{"attribute_name":"ファイル情報","attribute_type":"file","attribute_value_mlt":[{"accessrole":"open_date","date":[{"dateType":"Available","dateValue":"2017-04-14"}],"displaytype":"detail","filename":"20024-065-007.pdf","filesize":[{"value":"1.0 MB"}],"format":"application/pdf","licensetype":"license_note","mimetype":"application/pdf","url":{"label":"20024-065-007.pdf","url":"https://tokyo-metro-u.repo.nii.ac.jp/record/5672/files/20024-065-007.pdf"},"version_id":"7e1f0b7f-c262-4e86-a437-042ca6e667f1"}]},"item_keyword":{"attribute_name":"キーワード","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_subject":"都市計画","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"まちづくり","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"土地利用規制","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"まちづくり協定","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"法的正当性","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"公的関与","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"Urban Planning","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"Community Planning","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"Land Use Control","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"Community Agreements","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"Lega Status","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"Public Involvement","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"}]},"item_language":{"attribute_name":"言語","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_language":"jpn"}]},"item_resource_type":{"attribute_name":"資源タイプ","attribute_value_mlt":[{"resourcetype":"departmental bulletin paper","resourceuri":"http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501"}]},"item_title":"まちづくり協定 : その理論と実際","item_titles":{"attribute_name":"タイトル","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_title":"まちづくり協定 : その理論と実際"}]},"item_type_id":"3","owner":"3","path":["1328"],"pubdate":{"attribute_name":"公開日","attribute_value":"2017-05-01"},"publish_date":"2017-05-01","publish_status":"0","recid":"5672","relation_version_is_last":true,"title":["まちづくり協定 : その理論と実際"],"weko_creator_id":"3","weko_shared_id":3},"updated":"2023-06-19T16:58:55.344159+00:00"}