서비스 결합형 공공임대주거 사회복지시설의 공간면적구성에 관한 연구

Abstract

(Background and Purpose) As the importance of the concept of aging in place (AIP) for the elderly has become universal and a goal of welfare policy, the government has applied it to the design of residential spaces for this demographic group since mid-2010. Consequently, service-integrated public rental housing was built to provide customized services for the elderly on the lower floors as a social welfare space. This study aims to examine the characteristics, size, and area ratio of the space that is required for planning the size of social welfare facilities through a spatial review of supportive public rental housing built since mid-2010, and to clarify the relationship. (Method) This study covered public rental housing that incorporated social welfare facilities. A total of 21 complexes with design documents that provided area measurements were included. The designated spaces in these complexes were classified into five spatial sectors—medical/rehabilitation; social/education; living/convenience; office/management; and public—by considering the relationship between spatial sector, region, year, and number of households in each site through area measurement using area analysis. (Results) First, social welfare facilities were installed in the lower floors of residential buildings instead of using or extending idle sites in existing complexes, and their sizes ranged from 1,000 to 2,000 ㎡. Second, in terms of the total facility area, the social/education spatial sector occupied the largest area while the medical/rehabilitation spatial sector had the smallest area. Third, in terms of locality, they were concentrated in the Chungcheongnam-do region. In terms of spatial area composition, the social/education spatial sector was the largest in five regions and shared the same size with the public spatial sector in three regions, while the living/convenience spatial sector was the largest in one area. Fourth, in terms of spatial area by year, the social/education, public spatial, and living/convenience spatial sectors tended to increase with many changes in the area, while the medical/rehabilitation and office/management spatial sectors tended to decrease with little or no change. Fifth, the analysis of the spatial area of social welfare facilities against the number of households revealed that 100–150 households were the most common number of units that were built in terms of the size of household units, and the diversity of the area by spatial sector was also the highest. (Conclusions) The findings of this study will be useful in spatial planning of future social welfare facilities as it analyzed area composition based on the size of these facilities that were integrated into public rental housing in an aging society.