Exploring Characteristics of Walkable Neighborhood Design Strategies: A Case Study of Recent Trends and Pangyo · Dongtan Areas

Exploring Neighborhood Unit’s Planning Elements and Configuration Methods in Seoul and Singapore from a Walkability Perspective

“…In particular, the studies on the subjects of North America [2,3,10,21], the UK [4,13,17], Seoul [6,11,12,[22][23][24] and Singapore [7,8,25,26] investigate the social, economic, and political impact of residential development, the overall planning process including the inner workings of institutional bureaucracy, and flow of ideas between countries. Second, the studies [17][18][19][20][27][28][29] analyze the physical factors that constitute neighborhood unit planning as well as their configuration methods from a walkability perspective. For the most part, these papers identify morphological characteristics that create a pedestrian-oriented environment through empirical evidence, after which alternative methods are suggested [16,17].…”

“…However, from the 1960s onwards, suburbanization was promoted in revitalization efforts as a community's urban renewal process, and afterward, social aspects of community and environmental sustainability were further strengthened [33]. As a result, new models of neighborhood-unit planning were proposed: TODs (1986) encouraging the use of public transportation [34], New Urbanism (1999) claiming walkable neighborhood in that it pointed out mixed land use and a grid street system in contrast to Perry's model [35], and Fused Grid System (2002) characterized in that several housing clusters were grouped into one block, which cars cannot cross, and continuous pedestrian foot path system, connected to the open space at the center of the block, providing a direct route to the facilities [10,20,21,36]. Radburn (1928), Perry (1929), TODs (1986), New Urbanism (1999), and Fused Grid System (2002) explain the cases of North America [1][2][3]10,21,34,35].…”

“…In the cases of Seoul, the chronological flow of the residential developments adopting the neighborhood-unit planning was largely divided into five stages [6,11,12,20,[22][23][24]: the beginning of the modern urban planning in the 1960s; the massive supply of housing stocks in the 1970s; the large-scale residential district developments in the early 1980s; the first phase of new towns from the 1980s to the early 1990s; and finally the second phase of new towns in the late 1990s through the early 2000s. Perry's model was first introduced in 1956 [6], but the neighborhood unit concepts were applied during the construction of large-scale apartment complexes began in the late 1960s, as parts of the modern urban planning approach in Seoul.…”

“…Particularly, Mokdong (1983) is referred to utilize the planning model developed for Hook in the UK, and identified by the central commercial axis in a linear shape passing through the whole residential district providing openness and flexibility between neighborhood units [6,22]. In the early 2000s, the neighborhood-unit planning became a steady resource for the second phase of new towns, which was initiated as the call for sustainable communities [20,22]. Dongtan (2001) represents the second phase of new towns.…”

“…Another point of discussion attempted to reaffirm the basic goal of the neighborhood unit concept, with the conclusion that it produced residential areas in consideration of children and housewives' daily physical activities in the neighborhood, safe against disruptive automobile traffic [7,17]. Another was about the physical components of the neighborhood unit and whether they contributed to making the space pedestrian friendly [18][19][20]. A critique turned inward, with one area of discussion questioning the validity of neighborhood unit planning itself while still acknowledging its impact worldwide [15,16].…”