Abstract
“Transfer of development right (TDR)” has been considered as an important institution for the urban regeneration since recently. The TDR system is first released in 1990 in Taipei city. Today, there are many TDR institutions in Taipei, Taiwan. The important point is that all of them could be utilized overall the Taipei city, so the integrity between TDR and existing urban plan is important. In this study, we first summarize several TDR institutions including Monument TDR, Urban plan TDR and Dihua Street TDR in Taipei city. Then we make clear the position and characteristic of TDR within the existing urban plan system. Then, we focus on compare the difference of new type of Urban plan TDR called Floor area bank (FAB) started in Taipei since 2014 with previous TDR. We first clarify the system of Floor area bank in Taipei city and the reason why it was established as the substitute of existing TDR institution. The difference between FAB-TDR and existing urban plan TDR is that, by donating land for public facility to Taipei city government, developers can get floor area same as the value of that land in the past. However, developers should pay the “Floor area fee” to the “Floor Bank” (Taipei city government) to get the floor area, and the amount of floor area will be decided by the “Urban design committee of Taipei city” based on the application of developer. We consider that all TDR institution is a kind of instrument for obtaining extra floor area. Actually, developers use several institutions for obtaining extra floor area including TDR and other institutions, for example, “Bonus floor area” institution is also one of that. However, the difference between TDR and Bonus floor area is that the floor area acquired from TDR is permanent. To protect the right of accepting site of TDR, certificate of TDR will be issued by Taipei city government. Besides, accepting site will also be recorded in the online zoning system of Taipei city. We then make clear the characteristic of FAB-TDR by operating the actual utilization cases. From the macro level, FAB-TDR actually solves the issues of unbalanced location of receiving site in the previous TDR institutions by operating total volume control. From the micro level, we can see how urban design committee plays an important role on controlling the nearby community of receiving site. What' more, by operating the evaluation of “Floor area fee” and the deliberation of urban design committee, it shortens the process of using FAB-TDR. Basically, it takes about 8 months. Finally, we summarize the key factor of the success of FAB-TDR and summarize the issues of it today. From the viewpoint of Taipei city government, FAB-TDR should consider about to provides some incentive for the user. From the viewpoint of user (developer), the cost of FAB-TDR is too expensive. From the viewpoint of appraisal, appraisal method of “Floor area fee” should be modified.
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of Architecture and Planning (Transactions of AIJ)
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
