| Summary: | 碩士 === 臺灣大學 === 建築與城鄉研究所 === 98 === “Riverside Park” is a newly arising spatial product in Taipei. This study analyzes the political-economy development process of riverside park in Taipei. The objectives are to clarify the leading forces that transform traditionally inner city located parks in Taipei to riverside in the past decades and justify their impacts and issues caused by the transformation.
Since the Japanese Colonial Period, none of the city government leaders has positively faced the shortage of green space. The problem is solved when vacant riverside space is artificially transformed into “riverside park” after river remediation and when riverside flood terrain is institutionalized as urban space. However, the tradeoffs accompanied are the public conflicts in terms of flood protection, erosion control, native habitat protection, recreation, and spiritual values.
This study shapes the political-economy justification from the perspectives of Urban Growth Machine Theory. Three cases in the riverside park transforming history of Taipei (No. 14 and 15 Park, Bao-Tzang-Yen and Da-jia Riverside Park) are analyzed. The unique and unidentified ambiguity and the reasons that cause fast “riverside park” growth and being widely accepted by the public are that “riverside park” has become the greatest common divisor between urban growth coalition and anti-urban growth coalition. Moreover, the intervention initiated by the state produced as the outcome of applying urban planning and riverside renovation not only to symbolize a market mechanism of exchange value but to support the capitalist society, which can’t totally sustained by “inner city park.” “Riverside Park” slowly becomes an important collective and irreplaceable consumption in Taipei.
The spatial competition and capital agglomeration in Taipei is still challenging under the operation of urban growth machine. However, while “Riverside Park” is justified as institutionalized “park” and urban collective consumption, the real-world application of anti-urban growth coalition is weak due to the green image of “riverside parks” is diminishing. As a result, the public loses their privileges and incentives to fight for urban collective consumption produced by city government and pro-growth coalition.
|
|---|
