【摘要】：隨著大拆大建的房地產(chǎn)熱潮逐步降溫,國內(nèi)各城市開始思考舊城更新的諸多問題,歷史文化遺產(chǎn)屢遭破壞,使我們失去了城市的記憶、城市特色,取而代之的是千篇一律的兵營式建筑。作為城市規(guī)劃者,我們開始思考一個問題：自2004年《城市紫線管理辦法》、《歷史文化名城保護(hù)規(guī)劃規(guī)范》等文化遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)相關(guān)法規(guī)及規(guī)范頒布以后,在國內(nèi)知名學(xué)者的呼吁下,城市歷史文化遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)一直在有序進(jìn)行。十年過去了,人們對歷史遺存保護(hù)的觀念也逐步加強(qiáng),通過學(xué)習(xí)與借鑒西方國家經(jīng)驗我們對歷史遺跡保護(hù)方法逐步成熟,為何保護(hù)效果卻差強(qiáng)人意,為何守住不歷史建筑的“底線”、難逃被拆除的命運。隨著社會主義建設(shè)如火如荼的進(jìn)行,各種問題逐步的暴露,“依法治國”成為我國發(fā)展的新航標(biāo),將各項規(guī)劃內(nèi)容法定化是城市規(guī)劃領(lǐng)域“依法行政”的必然要求。城市紫線是我國獨創(chuàng)性的城市規(guī)劃術(shù)語,指的是歷史文化街區(qū)和歷史建筑的保護(hù)范圍界限。隨著建設(shè)部7號令控規(guī)新的編制辦法對城市四線的劃定強(qiáng)制性要求,紫線等四線內(nèi)容被提到了法定化的新高度。法定化的概念是指用法律的手段對行為加以約束,城市規(guī)劃中的法定化內(nèi)容是對建設(shè)行為的嚴(yán)格控制和指導(dǎo)。法定化的規(guī)劃內(nèi)容是對規(guī)劃最有效的執(zhí)行方式,也是規(guī)劃管理的重要保障和支撐。本文以大連城市紫線規(guī)劃編制法定化的實踐經(jīng)驗為切入點,探索實現(xiàn)城市紫線法定化的方法,分別從規(guī)劃編制中的法定化手段、配套相關(guān)法律法規(guī)建議、相關(guān)制度的建立、管理體制等幾大方面提出大連市城市紫線法定化的建議及策略,建立紫線法定化機(jī)制。本次研究內(nèi)容包含諸多理論創(chuàng)新價值、給相關(guān)政策的制定帶來啟發(fā)意義、對國內(nèi)其他城市的文化遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)法定化具有實踐借鑒意義。
[Abstract]:With the gradual cooling down of the real estate boom of large-scale demolition and construction, cities in China began to think about many problems in the renewal of the old cities, and the historical and cultural heritage was repeatedly destroyed, so that we lost the memory of the cities and the characteristics of the cities. Instead, there are identical barracks-style buildings. As a city planner, we begin to think about a problem: since the promulgation of the relevant laws and regulations on cultural heritage protection, such as the Management of the Purple Line in the City in 2004, the Conservation Planning Code for the Historic and Cultural cities, etc. Under the appeal of famous scholars in China, the protection of urban historical and cultural heritage has been carried out in an orderly manner. Ten years have passed, people have gradually strengthened the concept of conservation of historical remains, through learning and learning from the experience of Western countries, we gradually mature the protection of historical sites, why the protection effect is not satisfactory. Why not keep the historical building of the "bottom line", can not escape the fate of demolition. With the construction of socialism in full swing and various problems gradually exposed, "ruling the country according to law" has become a new navigation mark for the development of our country. Legalizing the contents of various plans is the inevitable requirement of "administration by law" in the field of urban planning. Urban Purple Line is an original term of urban planning in China, which refers to the limits of the protection scope of historical and cultural blocks and historical buildings. Along with the mandatory requirement of the new compilation method of order No. 7 of the Ministry of Construction to delimit the fourth line of the city, the content of the purple line and other four lines has been raised to a new height of legalization. The concept of legalization refers to the restriction of behavior by means of law, and the content of legalization in urban planning is the strict control and guidance of construction behavior. The content of legalized planning is the most effective way to carry out planning, and it is also the important guarantee and support of planning management. Based on the practical experience of Dalian city purple line planning, this paper explores the methods of realizing the city purple line legalization, respectively from the means of planning, supporting relevant laws and regulations, and the establishment of relevant system. This paper puts forward some suggestions and strategies for the legalization of purple line in Dalian city, and establishes the mechanism of legalization of purple line. The content of this study contains many theoretical innovative values, which brings enlightenment to the formulation of relevant policies, and has practical significance for the legalization of cultural heritage protection in other cities in China.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：大連理工大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類號】：TU984.114

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 胡斌;杜洋;許寧波;;國外城市歷史遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)制度體系綜述[J];福建建筑;2013年01期

2 趙波;;浦東新區(qū)紫線規(guī)劃編制方法和實踐探討[J];上海城市規(guī)劃;2012年01期

3 邵甬;阿蘭·馬利諾斯;;法國“建筑、城市和景觀遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)區(qū)”的特征與保護(hù)方法——兼論對中國歷史文化名鎮(zhèn)名村保護(hù)的借鑒[J];國際城市規(guī)劃;2011年05期

4 于冬波;黃祖群;王春暉;;城市歷史街區(qū)的動態(tài)保護(hù)規(guī)劃研究——以中國一汽歷史街區(qū)為例[J];城市發(fā)展研究;2011年05期

5 王濤;;文物保護(hù)單位保護(hù)規(guī)劃中保護(hù)范圍和建設(shè)控制地帶的劃定和分級[J];東南文化;2010年02期

6 楊斌;劉崢嶸;單丹;劉世暉;趙朋;;《城鄉(xiāng)規(guī)劃法》指導(dǎo)下的控制性詳細(xì)規(guī)劃編制——以唐山市曹妃甸工業(yè)區(qū)控制性詳細(xì)規(guī)劃(街區(qū)層面)為例[J];城市規(guī)劃;2010年03期

7 王琪;;對文物保護(hù)中有關(guān)保護(hù)界線概念的認(rèn)識[J];中國建設(shè)信息;2009年21期

8 奚雪松;俞孔堅;李海龍;;美國國家遺產(chǎn)區(qū)域管理規(guī)劃評述[J];國際城市規(guī)劃;2009年04期

9 李光旭;;歷史文化街區(qū)保護(hù)規(guī)劃相關(guān)概念解析[J];山西建筑;2009年19期

10 李光旭;;廣州歷史文化名城保護(hù)規(guī)劃編制研究[J];山西建筑;2009年18期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 吳云;歷史文化街區(qū)保護(hù)調(diào)查研究工作體系的中日比較研究[D];浙江大學(xué);2009年

2 陳蔚;我國建筑遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)理論和方法研究[D];重慶大學(xué);2006年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前8條

1 王欣;大連古典主義歷史街區(qū)復(fù)興策略與規(guī)劃研究[D];大連理工大學(xué);2014年

2 黎子銘;優(yōu)秀近現(xiàn)代建筑保護(hù)管理立法建議研究[D];華南理工大學(xué);2012年

3 劉穎奇;城市紫線劃定研究[D];蘇州科技學(xué)院;2010年

4 盧靜;我國人文遺跡保護(hù)法律制度研究[D];湖南大學(xué);2009年

5 吳朝宇;市場經(jīng)濟(jì)轉(zhuǎn)型時期我國城市歷史遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)管理探索[D];重慶大學(xué);2008年

6 劉婧;歷史文化遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)中的公眾參與[D];重慶大學(xué);2007年

7 徐曦;城市遺產(chǎn)保護(hù)的信息分析[D];武漢大學(xué);2005年

8 董偉;大連城市規(guī)劃史研究[D];大連理工大學(xué);2001年

，

本文編號：2298130