서울시 마을만들기형 지구단위계획의 주민참여 특성 및 효과분석 : 시범사업으로 추진중인 서원마을 사례를 중심으로

서울 마을만들기형 지구단위계획의 주민참여 특성과 효과를 분석했다.

The study went off with the following purposes; the first purpose is to study the necessity of the institutional introduction in theory of the resident participation in district unit planning as Machizkuri and District Unit Planning’s intersection. The other purpose is to analyze what kind of resident participation program has affected the resident’s perception in terms of the pilot project of the District Unit Planning. The ultimate reason to proceed the study in such manner is because the Resident Proposal and Agreement System, which has introduced to be the resident participation within District Unit Planning carrying the legal binding force, has been partial to the formal manner.

In case of Machizkuri, since the revival of local self-governing system in the mid-1990s, it was introduced actively by civic groups and self-governing body. However, the cases being just one-off business have been increased due to the deficiency of the approach to the space and architectural planning as well as the imperfection of the institutional and legal strategy. ‘Resident participation in district unit planning’ was introduced to supplement the limitation of the existing institution. Moreover, the pilot project is currently in progress.

The case study is on the analysis of ‘Gangdong-Gu, Seo-won Maul.’ The effects of the resident participation and analysis of characteristic were carried out targeting the case study. The criteria of the study are as follows; ①participant, ②seating arrangement, ③participation level, ④used tool, ⑤participation method, and ⑥discussion subject and stage. Also, the targets of the study are the six participatory activities during the Seo-won Maul pilot project. The analysis showed that all of the ‘planner + resident representatives + officials + residents’ took part in the resident meeting and resident briefing. That is to say, it helped to build relationships between the participants.

The ‘participation level’ is the ostensible involvement because the residents only receive the information through planners and administration. Residents briefing was official sessions to introduce the pilot project and to select the resident representative. The topic of the discussion had changed from ‘problem sharing’ to ‘space design’ during the resident representatives’ workshop as time passed. The participation level had moved on from ‘ostensible involvement’ to ‘active involvement.’ Moreover, various participation methods to promote the resident’s understanding and build consensus have been attempted. During this process, different tools such as image card and model were used.

The effectiveness analysis of the resident participation progressed in two ways. One way is the consideration of resident’s perception change, and the other is the survey regarding the effect of the resident involvement. The result of the consideration of the resident perception change showed that the distrust of officials expressed in Amsa bridge construction and budgeting issues. However, as the pilot project has gone along, trust toward planners and officials has gone up. Also, in the survey, the formation of trust, promotion of understanding, encouragement of involvement, and building the consensus appeared to rise.

The resident briefing session and resident delegation workshop came out to be the most influential activities. Furthermore, the most advantageous methods appeared to be the priority order determination of the public enterprise and the outline arrangement of the community. The valuable tools were the models and town map or plans. I now propose the following factors based on the study of ‘the resident participation in district unit planning.’ First and foremost, we must acknowledge the importance of building relationships between the participants, such as resident, planner, and officials, in terms of the resident participation in district unit planning.

One of the most important issues in Machizkuri is to provide an opportunity to participants to build up their relationships with each other. Further, it is critical to form a trust among resident, planner, and officials. Second, instead of the ostensible involvement, it is vital to focus on how to make people involve in the specific matters more actively. During the active involvement, residents would do their own decision-making, and planners and officials would play a role of a helpful guide. Lastly, various alternatives and information tools, which help residents’ understanding, should be broadly utilized to support reaching agreements.

For instance, selected criteria and suggested alternatives regarding the town issues could be presented to the local. Also, town maps, plans, and models could be used in one of the most effective ways. The consequence of the study would not only relate to ‘the resident participation in district unit planning,’ but also apply extensively to ‘the urban design of residents participation’ and ‘Machizkuri project.’ 이 연구는 다음의 두 가지 목적을 가지고 진행되었다. 첫째, 마을만들기와 지구단위계획제도의 접합점으로서 ‘마을만들기형 지구단위계획’의 제도적 도입 필요성을 이론적 고찰과 사례분석을 통해 확인하는 것이다. 둘째는, 마을만들기형 지구단위계획 시범사업에서 사용된 다양한 주민참여 프로그램이 실제 주민참여에 있어 주민들의 인식의 변화에 어떤 영향을 주었는지를 분석하기 위한 것이다.

이와 같은 관점에서 연구를 진행하는 이유는, 그동안 지구단위계획에서 주민참여가 제도적인 틀의 부재로 그 실효성이 낮게 나타났고, 1990년대 중반 이후 국내에 도입된 마을만들기의 경우에도 공간·건축계획에 대한 접근이 부족하고, 법적·제도적 장치가 없어 일회성 사업으로 끝나는 경우가 많아, 이에 대한 제도적 개선 시급히 요구되기 때문이다. 다행스럽게도 기존 제도의 한계를 보완하기 위해 서울시에서는 2008년부터 ‘마을만들기형 지구단위계획’이라는 새로운 제도를 도입하고, 2009년 현재 시범사업을 진행하고 있다. 이 연구에서는 시범사업 4개소 가운데 주민참여 과정이 상대적으로 활발한 ‘강동구 서원마을’ 사례를 대상으로 주민참여 특성분석과 효과분석을 수행하였다. 사례분석을 위해 ①참여주체 ②좌석배치 ③참여수준 ④사용도구 ⑤참여방법 ⑥논의주제 및 단계를 분석항목으로 선정하고, 총 여섯 번의 서원마을 주민참여활동에 대해 분석하였다. 분석결과, 주민간담회와 주민설명회에서는 ‘계획가+주민대표+행정+일반주민’이 모두 참여하는 특징을 보였다. 이는 다양한 참여주체간의 관계를 형성하는데 도움을 주었다. 참여수준은 ‘명목적 참여’의 성격을 보이는데, 계획초기에는 주로 계획가와 행정으로부터 정보를 제공받는 소극적인 입장의 주민참여수준이 나타나기 때문이다.

주민설명회에서는 시범사업의 소개 및 주민대표를 임명하는 공식적인 자리로 마련되어 선언적인 의미가 부여되었다. 또한 주민대표 워크숍을 통해 주민참여활동이 증가하고 발전할수록 논의주제 및 단계가 ‘문제의 공유’에서 ‘공간디자인’으로 확장되는 경향을 보였다. 참여수준도 ‘명목적 참여’에서 ‘주민권리적 참여’로 변화