초록 close

Designers and planning professionals have made much efforts to develop design concepts and typology for residential streets. These developments have resulted in technical terms that attempt to coin types of residential streets, such as vehicle/pedestrian versus pedestrian only street. Thus these types and concepts are meant to serve as norms in design and planning so that they have been applied and tested to a number of residential projects since modern theories of site planning emerged. Although these professional norms appear to imply or even dictate certain patterns of and differences in human function, they certainly did not derive from empirical data regarding residents' use and the test-after-application has only been based upon insights of a limited number of design/planning professionals. This study, based on an analysis of the data gathered from 10 different residential estates within the geographical boundary of the Seoul metropolitan area, clearly indicates that the design norms, coined in terms of places and types of function, have little implication regarding residents' street behavior. In fact, the data show that there is no significant difference in residents' use between different types and design concepts of residential streets. This study also provides data that help understand residents' use of streets and clearly shows that street, although by no means designed with residents' use in mind, is certainly an active residential setting, used for different activities such as playing, sitting, talking, and working. The study indicates a strong potential of residental streets as an open space for residential activities and urges a shift in the academic and professional focus from the abstract design concepts toward the incorporation of this human use.