Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/79230


Title: 鳥籠高樓─由土地整合角度論臺北市住宅開發型態之變化
Building High-rises on Small Plots: Housing Development Analysis From the View of Land Assembly in the Taipei City
Authors: 吳佳儒
Wu, Chia Ru
Contributors: 林子欽
丁秀吟

Lin, Tzu Chin
Ding, Hsiu Yin

吳佳儒
Wu, Chia Ru
Keywords: 土地開發
土地整合
住宅開發型態
集群分析方法
land development
land assembly
housing development projects
cluster analysis
Date: 2015
Issue Date: 2015-11-02 14:54:58 (UTC+8)
Abstract: 在我國土地開發市場中,開發者應偏好整合坵塊、以大面積土地進行開發,惟相關報導指出臺北市近年以狹小基地開發之鳥籠建案有所增加,遂形成實際與預期不符的矛盾情況。本文從土地供給角度出發,認為除了地價昂貴之外,土地整合成本亦對開發基地規模有決定性的影響,且由於容積獎勵制度的施行,當開發者取得大小足以開發的土地後,可能不再進行土地整合、而改以資本替代之。
為驗證上述推測,本研究以民國83至102年第三種住宅區新建住宅之使用執照存根為基礎,建立開發個案之資料庫;並利用集群分析方法,對開發個案之土地、資本配置型態進行歸納。經過統計,歷年均有近40%的新建住宅屬於基地狹小之鳥籠建案,且集群分析實證結果指出在空間上,市中心至郊區的住宅開發型態呈現單獨小規模開發至整合大規模開發的遞移變化,代表土地整合的難題已長期存在於臺北市住宅開發市場中,其中又以土地較零碎的市中心更為明顯。
此外,本文另以基地面積、公告現值與政策虛擬變數對實際容積率進行線性迴歸,結果顯示整併土地確實有提升容積總樓地板面積的規模經濟效果,但效果卻不如政策性容積獎勵來得明顯;且經過模擬亦得知若欲達到同樣的樓地板面積增量,申請政策性獎勵所需的成本將遠低於進行土地整合。是以在取得合理規模之基地後,土地整合已非必要,再加上多樣化卻缺乏總量管制的容積獎勵,開發者將傾向透過政策性手段來達到擴大資本開發規模之目的,遂造成住宅開發型態呈現空間垂直的成長。
In Taiwan, land developers are expected to prefer assembling small plots into a large lot for development. However, it is widely reported recently that development projects of building on a small plot have been increasing in Taipei. This phenomenon is inconsistent with the above expectation. From the perspective of land supply, this study argues that apart from land prices, costs of land assembly also have a decisive influence on the lot size for land developments. Also, because of the bulk reward regulations, developers might be less willing to conduct land assembly. Instead, they choose capital intensive means which presented as building high-rise housings once they obtain a site.
To verify the argument, this study establishes a database of housing projects based on the residential usage licenses from 1994 to 2013, and observes allocation patterns of land and capital by using cluster analysis. Statistically, there are about 40% of housing projects that were built on plots smaller than 330 m2 every year. The empirical result of cluster analysis shows that housing development patterns change from downtown to suburbs. In downtown area, most developers build houses on a small single plot. However, they assemble plots to get a bigger site in the suburbs. It means that housing development market of Taipei has been entangled by land assembly problems for a long time. This issue explicitly exists in downtown area where lands are much more fragmented.
In addition, this study uses site area, current land value and a policy dummy as independent variables and building density as dependent variable to conduct a linear regression. The result shows that, although land assembly increases the floor area, its effect is not as large as that of policy incentives. Based on this result, the comparison analysis of land assembly and policy incentives also points out that the application of bulk reward costs less than land assembly, while they can enjoy the same floor area. Therefore, it is believed that developers tend to choose increasing housing scale by applying bonuses instead of assembling lands. This trend makes the housing development forms vertically expand consequently.
Reference: 中文參考文獻

1. 內政部建築研究所,2010,「臺灣房地產景氣動向季報」,第12卷第三期。
2. 朱芳妮、張金鶚、陳淑美,2008,「已購屋者及購屋搜尋者之購屋需求決策比較分析─兼論顯示性偏好及敘述性偏好之差異」,『都市與計劃』,35(4):339-359。
3. 李春長、游淑滿、張維倫,2012,「公共設施、環境品質與不動產景氣對住宅價格影響之研究─兼論不動產景氣之調節效果」,『住宅學報』,21(1):67-87。
4. 李權益,2012,「臺北市劃定更新地區容積獎勵對基地規模的效益─從交易成本觀點探討」,國立臺北大學不動產與城鄉環境學系碩士論文:臺北。
5. 周文賢,2002,「多變量統計分析:SAS/STAT使用方法」,臺北:智勝。
6. 周天穎、簡甫任、雷祖強,2003,「都市地區土地利用變遷量化分析之研究」,『臺灣土地研究』,6(1):105-130。
7. 周春山、陳素素、羅彥,2005,「廣州市建成區住房空間結構及其成因」,『地理研究』,24(1):77-88。
8. 林子欽、許明芳,2003,「個別土地開發前的產權調整─市地重劃區個案觀察」,『臺灣土地研究』,6(2):1-16。
9. 林左裕,2010,「不動產投資管理」,臺北:智勝文化。
10.林祖嘉,2000,「住宅生產函數與要素替代彈性:CES與VES之比較」,『住宅學報』,9(1):49-60。
11.林祖嘉、林素菁,2009,「住宅次市場定義合理性之探討:因素分析法之應用」,『都市與計劃』,36(2):133-153。
12.林震岩,2007,「多變量分析─SPSS的操作與應用」,臺北:智勝。
13.金家禾,2001,「兩岸土地開發制度與城市競爭力關係之探討」,『臺灣土地研究』,2:73-100。
14.張怡文、江穎慧、張金鶚,2009,「分量迴歸在大量估價模型之應用─非典型住宅估價之改進」,『都市與計劃』,36(3):281-304。
15.張巍、胥維桃、鄭增楓,2007,「住宅項目選址決策模型 」,『重慶大學學報』,30(8):153-158。
16.財團法人國土規劃及不動產資訊中心,2007,「臺北市容積檢討與容積調整機制之建立案」,臺北市政府委託研究。
17.財團法人國土規劃及不動產資訊中心,2010,「容積移轉制度─容積銀行操作機制可行性研究」,臺北市政府委託研究。
18.郭益銘,2007,「臺北都會區住宅個案產品面積離散度之分析」,國立政治大學地政學系碩士論文:臺北。
19.陳彥仲、陳佳欣、吳俊賢,2004,「家戶之住宅選擇模型與住宅之家戶競爭模型實證比較分析」,『住宅學報』,13(1):1-13。
20.陳培勇、陳風波,2011,「土地細碎化的起因及其影響的研究綜述」,『中國土地科學』,25(9):90-96。
21.曾禹瑄,2015,「土地開發的產權僵局─以松山二期重劃區為例」,國立政治大學地政學系碩士論文:臺北。
22.曾國雄、曹勝雄、廖耀東,1992,「臺北都會區土地使用形態與環境品質之研究」,『都市與計劃』,19(1):33-52。
23.黃方欣,2013,「反共有財是悲劇嗎?—土地產權的實證結果」,國立政治大學地政學系碩士論文:臺北。
24.劉小蘭、高平洲,2000,「容積獎勵對都市發展影響之研究─以臺北市為例」,『2000年中華民國住宅學會第九屆學會論文集』。
25.蔡友翔,2011,「都市內部建築物重開發之影響因素─以臺北市為例」,國立政治大學地政學系碩士論文:臺北。
26.邊泰明,1993,「土地使用分區大規模土地開發效果分析」,『土地經濟年刊』,4:131-150。


外文參考文獻

1. Adams, D. C., Baum, A., & MacGregor, B., 1988, “The Availability of Land for Inner City Development: A Case Study of Inner Manchester”, Urban Studies, 25:62-76.
2. Asami, Y, 1987, “A Game-theoretic Approach to the Division of Profits from Economic Land Development”, Regional Science and Urban Economics, 18(2):233-46.
3. Buchanan, J. M., 1972, “Politics, Property, and the Law: An Alternative Interpretation of Miller et al. v. Schoene”, Journal of Law and Economics, 15(2):439-452.
4. Colwell, P. F., & Munneke, H. J., 1997, “The Structure of Urban Land Prices”, Journal of Urban Economics, 41(3):321-336.
5. Eckart, W. , 1985,“On the Land Assembly Problem”, Journal of Urban Economics, 18: 364-78.
6. Heller, M. A., 1998, “The Tragedy of the Anticommons: Property in the Transition from Marx to Markets”, Harvard Law Review, 111(3):621-688.
7. Heller, M., & Hills, R., 2008, “Land assembly districts”, Harvard Law Review, 121(6):1465-1527.
8. Jabarin, A. S., & Epplin, F. M., 1994, “Impacts of Land Fragmentation on the Cost of Producing Wheat in the Rain-fed Region of Northern Jordan”, Agricultural Economics, 11(2):191-196.
9. Lin, T.-C, & Evans, A., 2000, “The Relationship Between the Price of Land and Size of Plot When Plots Are Small”, Land Economics, 76(3):386-394.
10.Lin, T.-C., 2005, “Land Assembly in a Fragmented Land Market through Land Readjustment”, Land Use Policy, 22(2):95-102.
11.Niroula, G. S., & Thapa, G. B., 2005, “Impacts and Causes of Land Fragmentation, and Lessons Learned from Land Consolidation in South Asia”, Land Use Policy, 22(4):358-372.
12.Ram, K. A., Tsunekawa, A., Saha, D., & Miyazaki, T., 1999, “Subdivision and Fragmentation of Land Holdings and Their Implication in Desertification in the Thar Desert, India”, Journal of Arid Environments, 41(4):463-477.
13.Shoup, D. C., 1970, “The Optimal Timing of Urban Land Development”, Papers in Regional Science, 25(1):33-44.
14.Shoup, D. C., 2008, "Graduated Density Zoning", Journal of Planning Education and Research, 28(2):161-179.
15.Tu, Y., & Goldfinch, J., 1996, “A Two-stage Housing Choice Forecasting Model”, Urban Studies, 33(3):517-538.
16.西山弘泰,2007,「首都圏郊外におけるミニ開発地域の形成要因と住民特性」,『文学研究論集:文学・史学・地理学』,27:201-221。
17.勝又済,2007,「建て替え誘導を通じた郊外既成ミニ開発住宅地の居住環境整備論」,国土技術政策総合研究所研究報告。


網頁參考文獻

1. 陳宥臻,2014年09月05日,「小基地鳥籠建案 北市增多」,中時電子報,2014年10月29日
http://www.chinatimes.com/newspapers/20140905000565-260110
2. 住展房屋網,2013年11月14日,「臺北市鳥籠建案 每3案就有1案」,2014年10月29日
http://www.myhousing.com.tw/index.php?option=com_flexicontent&view=items&id=46439:-31
3. 住展房屋網,2014年10月23日,「公設比創新高 越早買越划算 大台北人均居住面積僅約6坪」,2014年10月29日
http://www.myhousing.com.tw/index.php?option=com_flexicontent&view=items&cid=1048:2012-09-03-06-51-20&id=52163:-65216252163&Itemid=158
Description: 碩士
國立政治大學
地政研究所
102257004
Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0102257004
Data Type: thesis
Appears in Collections:[地政學系] 學位論文

Files in This Item:

File SizeFormat
700401.pdf1386KbAdobe PDF203View/Open


All items in 學術集成 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


社群 sharing