Guide
The "separation of the old and the new" model is a common method in the planning of famous historical and cultural cities, which reconciles the sharp contradiction between protection and development by shaping the spatial structure of "old city + old city". Based on the perspective of historical investigation, this paper sorts out the evolution logic of the local "separation of the old and the new" model: in the period of planned economy, the prototype of the "separation of the old and the new" model comes from the "Liang Chen Plan" during the planned economy period and the construction of (famous city) satellite cities under the influence of the Soviet Union, which has obvious characteristics of "authority shaping"; In the period of market economy after the reform and opening up, the "separation of the old and the new" model gradually matured after the adjustment of power (division of administrative power and allocation of land development rights) in order to adapt to the transformation of decentralized organization and land capitalization. This paper finds that the construction of the "separation of the old and the new" mechanism dominated by public power is still unreasonable under the current situation, and the transcendental planning process lacks timely response to the changes in the market environment and the germination of civic consciousness, which leads to many difficulties in its specific practice. Then, this paper considers the transformation trend of the "separation of the old and the new" model in the era of refined governance: the "separation of the old and the new" model needs to carry out endogenous innovation, and the boundary between public and private rights should be flexibly adjusted according to its practical scale (macro, meso, and micro), and new coping methods can be explored around the three key directions of "grasping the difference in scale", "coordinating the relationship between the old and the new", and "balancing public and private interests".
Number of words: 7282 words
Reading time: 22 minutes
author
Huang Longyan, School of Architecture and Urban Planning, Nanjing University
Huang Kaixuan, Department of Geography, National University of Singapore
Xiao Yanyang, School of Architecture and Planning, Hunan University
Yi Yu, School of Architecture and Planning, Hunan University
keyword
Famous historical and cultural city, "separation of old and new" model, planning history, protection methods, governance transformation
INTRODUCTION
The year 2022 marks the 40th anniversary of the establishment of the system of famous historical and cultural cities in mainland China, and in the process of Chinese-style modernization, it is necessary to explore a more scientific protection planning path and explore and expand more diverse value connotations [1]. For China, which has experienced an era of rapid urbanization and large-scale construction, the difficulty of the protection and planning of historical and cultural cities is so high that it can be called "thorny and thorny" in the world. In particular, when cultural and economic demands are projected on urban space at the same time, the contradiction between protection and development becomes extremely acute and even irreconcilable [2]. So, how to achieve the protection of historical and cultural cities through planning layout and spatial structure shaping? In the local urban planning practice, the "separation of the old and the new" model has always been a classic topic that cannot be bypassed.
The "separation of the old and the new" model refers to the urban development model of "opening up new cities outside the old city and dual (multi) centers going hand in hand" [3], which requires strategic thinking about the overall layout and structure of the city and clarifying the main functional division between the old city and the new city [4-5]. Looking back on history, the planning of famous cities such as Luoyang, Suzhou, Guilin, Datong, Pingyao, and Hancheng has practiced the "separation of the old and the new" model to a certain extent. In these planning cases, there are both successful and failed lessons of poor protection. In order to better embark on a new journey of famous city protection planning, it is necessary to re-discuss and rethink the model of "separating the old from the new". Based on the perspective of historical investigation, this paper sorts out the evolutionary logic of the "separation of the old and the new" model from two different stages: the planned economy period and the market economy period. At the same time, it is noted that the basic driving force supporting the operation of the "separation of old and new" mode has undergone profound changes under the new situation such as stock planning, so it is also necessary to discuss the specific problems in the transformation process of the "separation of old and new" model and the refined governance path to adapt to future development.
01
Pioneer explorations in the period of planned economy
From the point of view of origin, the model of "separation of the old and the new" in local practice has germinated in the period of planned economy, and the "Liangchen Plan" and the construction of satellite cities in the early famous cities reflect the idea of "separation of the old and the new" to a certain extent. Under a highly centralized system, the practice of "separating the old from the new" at that time could be regarded as "authority shaping" dominated by public power.
1.1 Proposal and shelving of the "Liang Chen Plan".
According to relevant studies, the local prototype of the "separation of the old and the new" model can be traced back to the "Proposal on the Location of the Administrative Center of the Central People's Government" (later known as the "Liang Chen Plan") put forward by Liang Sicheng and Chen Zhanxiang, two urban planning pioneers [6-7]. After the founding of the People's Republic of China, Beijing became the capital of the country. Since the original land and buildings for military and political organs in Beijing could no longer meet the needs of the capital's functions, the planning and construction of the capital's administrative center was put on the political agenda and became a matter in which the central decision-making level had to be directly involved. In November 1949, a team of Soviet experts put forward a "Proposal for the Improvement of the Municipal Administration of Beijing", which advocated "establishing the administrative center in the old city"[7]. Liang and Chen argued that "the high population density and traffic problems caused by the continued construction of buildings along the streets of the city will become the bane of disrupting the physical order of Beijing." In February 1950, Liang and Chen then suggested that "a moderate location east of the Gongzhu's Tomb and west of the Temple of the Moon in the western suburbs outside the city should be used as the location of the administrative center of the capital"[8]. The main differences between the two schools of thought are whether to establish a single-center structure that expands from the old city to the surrounding areas, or to establish a dual-center structure of "old city + new city" (Figure 1).
Figure 1 Comparison between the Soviet expert plan and the "Liang Chen plan".
(Source: Redrawn from Ref. [7][8])
The "Liang Chen Plan" put forward the ideas of "evacuating the function and population of the old city", "achieving a balance between jobs and housing", "relying on land reform" and "building a city wall park", and carefully arranged the construction sequence in combination with the development situation and financial situation at that time. It can be said that the "Liang Chen Plan" is full of expectations for the advantages of the socialist system, and also has the foresight to see the positive effect of the "separation of the old and the new" model in alleviating the diseases of the capital city. However, the expression of the results of the "Liang Chen Plan" mainly depends on the knowledge and literacy of Liang and Chen, and its scientific nature is debatable, coupled with the political and economic reasons at that time, the "Liang Chen Plan" was not adopted in the end. In recent years, with the proposal of the construction plan of Tongzhou City Sub-center in Beijing and the planning outline of Xiong'an New Area in Hebei Province, there has once again set off a wave of discussion on the "Liang Chen Plan" [9]. Although the "Liang Chen Plan" was shelved forever, the idea of "separating the old from the new" contained in it had a profound impact on the protection and development of famous cities in the future.
1.2 Construction of satellite cities under the influence of the Soviet Union
In the early days of the founding of the People's Republic of China, the severe internal and external development environment forced New China to "fall to the side of socialism." With the signing of the Sino-Soviet Treaty of Friendship, Mutual Assistance and Alliance and the implementation of the Soviet Union's various aids to China, the whole country quickly set off an upsurge of learning from the Soviet Union's "big brother" [10]. With the assistance and guidance of the Soviet Union, many cities began to build satellite towns on the outskirts to undertake major industrial projects. Among them, Xi'an, Luoyang and Datong cities are not only the key cities of the national industrialization construction ("156" project), but also the historical and cultural cities with better preservation of traditional features, and they generally choose to "avoid the old city to build satellite cities". However, the formation of the "separation of old and new" structures in these cities is contingent and unconscious—largely the result of a combination of exploration and site selection factors, rather than being dominated by explicit planning concepts [11]. Moreover, under the guidance of the concepts of "production first, life later" and "individual subordination to the collective", the connection between the old and new cities is relatively separated, and the industrial satellite city is more like an independent enclave for the implementation of the layout of the country's major productive forces.
Fig.2 Construction of industrial satellite cities in the early days of famous cities
(Image source: Redrawn from Ref. [11])
02
Adjustment of power in the period of market economy
The reform and opening up marked the arrival of the market economy period, and local governments began to explore urban development and benefit distribution mechanisms that integrate the market. Driven by the interweaving of urbanization, administrative decentralization and land capitalization, the "separation of the old and the new" model has undergone a path reconstruction, which is mainly reflected in the redivision of administrative powers and the reallocation of development rights in land use. After the adjustment of power in the market economy period, the "separation of the old and the new" model is also gradually maturing in the process of adaptation.
2.1 Adapt to the division of administrative power in decentralized organizations
Due to the changes in intergovernmental relations caused by the reform of the tax-sharing system, the central government and local governments have not always been able to form a unified value in the protection of famous cities. Although the title of "National Historical and Cultural City" is also an achievement of local governments, some local governments have a negative attitude towards subsequent conservation efforts in the face of high opportunity costs [12]. Therefore, in order to take into account the rigidity of target transmission and the flexibility of specific implementation, it is necessary to redivide administrative powers. The spatial development model adopted by the famous city is very important, and it needs to be considered comprehensively and strictly transmitted at the beginning. Only by embedding the strategic intent of "separating the old from the new" into the framework of government management authority, protection regulations and statutory planning can the waste of spatial performance be avoided to the greatest extent. Otherwise, if the higher shadow land price (1) in the old city area cannot be transferred to the new city through structural adjustment, it will hinder the improvement of the overall land efficiency of the city [2].
At the same time, under the administrative contracting system, local governments also have a certain "residual claim right"[13], and local governments can flexibly arrange urban layouts when carrying out protection tasks assigned by the central government. For example, Huangshan City (a national-level historical and cultural city) is required to reflect the goal orientation of "famous mountains and beautiful rivers - urban civilization" in the overall plan, and in the specific implementation process, Huangshan City chooses to implement the layout structure of the group: She County is positioned as a "national historical and cultural city and a sub-center focusing on the development of tourism service industry" in the functional structure of the municipal urban system, and is given key protection; Tunxi District and Huizhou District are positioned as "multi-functional and comprehensive central cities" and "modern manufacturing bases", respectively, and are being developed with priority [14]. In addition, Huangshan City has also actively improved the coordination mechanism in terms of functional division of labor and industrial cooperation (Figure 3).
Fig.3 Overall planning of Huangshan City
(Photo source: Huangshan Municipal Bureau of Planning and Natural Resources)
2.2 Allocation of development rights to adapt to land capitalization
The market economy is accompanied by the process of land capitalization, and even so, local governments still have many resources such as land, finance, and taxation, and have strong mobilization capabilities. Since state-owned land is a state-owned asset that can be directly operated by local governments and a collateral that can be used for bank credit, and its land development rights are a key resource that can be allocated by local governments, there is no need to go through a tortuous negotiation process, and the dual purposes of "opening up new functional areas" and "protecting the pattern of historical features" can be achieved by virtue of the differentiated allocation of development rights in various regions. These administrative advantages allow local governments to outline the general form of "separation of the old and the new" and allocate initial property rights at the district scale by means of general control. In the planning and construction stage, the right to land development is granted to market entities and social entities in the planning permission, and local governments can also achieve a balance between the interests of different areas through the unified collection of economic management authority, the transfer of floor area ratio, and the transfer of fiscal and tax payments.
Table 1 The "separation of old and new" model represents cities
(Table source: drawn and photographed by the author)
The allocation and transfer of land development rights through the composite path of "administration + market" to restore the blueprint concept of "both the old and the new, taking into account the ancient and the modern", is the basic operating logic of the "separation of the old and the new" model in the market economy period. In the early 1990s, many cities set off a boom in the construction of new cities, which coincided with the initial stage of the practice of protecting famous cities[15], and in order to avoid excessive concentration of population and resources in the old cities, famous cities such as Suzhou, Guilin, and Fenghuang transferred the limited construction capacity of the old cities to the new cities, thus promoting the coordinated promotion of cultural relics protection and economic growth tasks (Table 1). At this time, the "separation of the old and the new" model is generally manifested in two forms: (1) cities with sufficient supply of new construction land in the suburbs will build new areas that are contiguous with the old city; (2) Cities that are constrained by topographical conditions or have complex land property rights in the suburbs will use the development foundation of existing towns to build new towns that maintain a certain distance from the old city.
03
The practical dilemma of the "separation of old and new" model
In the period of market economy, although the "separation of the old and the new" model has also been adapted to power, the mechanism construction is still dominated by public power. In addition, the "separation of the old and the new" model also has the a priori characteristics of "authority shaping" to a certain extent, and lacks a timely response to changes in the market environment and the germination of civic consciousness. The original design intention of the "separation of the old and the new" model is mainly based on the consideration of planning layout and spatial structure, and almost no system has envisaged the transformation approach from control to governance. Once the power of the "separation of the old and the new" model is locked in inefficiency, it is very easy to fall into the whirlpool of contradictions in the changing situation.
3.1 Insufficient constraints and policy failures in planning transmission
The extent to which a city's development strategy and planning layout fall into the category of "residual control" is inconclusive, and in reality, it is also ambiguous whether a city needs to implement the "separation of the old and the new" model. In other words, the "separation of the old and the new" is an administrative matter that can be coordinated internally, and the local government can choose to implement or terminate it according to the needs of actual development. Although urban planning needs to convey the will of the higher-level government and decompose the goals of the higher-level planning, it is often "selectively implemented" according to the interests and preferences after the planning is completed. Due to the lack of rigidity in the implementation of supervision, even the "separation of the old and the new" structure determined by the statutory planning is difficult to form a "hard constraint" on the subsequent development, which leads to the dilemma of frequent "failure" of many relevant policies and regulations, for example: the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development's "urban physical examination" work does not take the overly abstract spatial structure as the evaluation standard for the implementation of urban planning; For the behavior of ineffective protection of famous cities, it will only be dealt with by "circulating criticism" and "revoking the title", and there will be no substantive punishment.
3.2 The system on which property rights are based is vague and the subject is missing
In Western countries, land development rights are derived from land ownership (private rights), and the realization of the "separation of the old and the new" in their historical cities requires the transfer of development rights at the block and building scales, in addition to relying on the guidance of government decrees [16]. The land development rights transferred by Western historical cities correspond to the second-level development rights in the mainland land rights system (2), and the "sending area" and "receiving area" of the transfer of development rights correspond to the new and old cities in the "separation of the old and the new". In the era of focusing on the stock of property rights, if the mainland's "separation of the old and the new" model can introduce a mechanism for the transfer of development rights, it will greatly mobilize the enthusiasm of the market and society to participate in the protection of famous cities, and at the same time can alleviate the public financial burden of heritage protection at the medium and micro scales. However, it should be noted that the mainland's land development rights are derived from national sovereignty (public rights)[17], and a third-party management platform similar to the Western "development rights bank" has not yet been established. Although some famous cities have begun to pilot the transfer of development rights (or "floor area ratio transfer") mechanism, the whole process is essentially a "horizontal inter-governmental transaction" undertaken by local governments, and lacks the in-depth participation of market entities and social entities [18]. In the future, it is also necessary to actively explore a mechanism for the transfer of development rights that takes into account public interests, market benefits, and citizens' rights and interests.
3.3 Overdevelopment risk driven by land finance
In the process of China's market-oriented transformation, the use of land as a "monetary anchor" in the development of new cities has initiated the historical process of rapid urbanization, and the evolution of urban spatial structure has been induced by institutional changes and highly profit-seeking development methods [19]. In the past 30 years, the "separation of old and new" model has released a more positive signal for the investment and development of new towns in famous cities, and the growth rate of the built-up area of new cities is significantly higher than that of old cities (Tables 2 and 3). For example, Suzhou and Guilin have taken the opportunity of protecting the world's cultural and natural heritage to greatly expand the city's new city space. However, due to the differences in endowment conditions and development momentum, the new city development movement in different famous cities will also produce different effects. When the operating income of the new city is not enough to cover the local debt gap, it will face the risk of overdraft and overdevelopment, such as the Yudong New Town in Datong and the Southwest New Area in Yulin.
Table 2 Comparison of the growth rate of built-up area between the old and new urban areas of some famous historical and cultural cities (3)
(Table source: Original data provided by "Science Data Bank" website)
Table 3 "Man-Whitney rank sum" test of the growth rate of built-up area
(Note: 95% level confidence)
3.4 Static protection misunderstanding of a single value orientation
The old city (ancient city) is a dynamic space that carries multiple values such as society, economy, culture, and life, rather than a static museum or simple consumer goods. The original intention of the "separation of the old and the new" model was to achieve a balanced development between the new city and the old city, but the excessive shift of the center of gravity of urban functions to the new city will also lead to the shrinkage and destruction of the old city [20]. For example, the ancient city of Hancheng in Shaanxi, the ancient city of Pingyao in Shanxi, and the ancient city of Dongchang in Liaocheng in Shandong Province retained their cultural landscape attributes, but after the marketing boom subsided, they encountered a depression of "people going to empty buildings" (Figure 4). On the other hand, some ancient cities excessively pursue the value orientation of consumerism, and the real motive of capital to grab excess profits is often concealed under the "coat" of ancient city protection, although the overall destruction of the historical landscape is avoided, but in the long run, it will induce the alienation of historical and cultural values, the hollowing out of social life and other ills.
Fig.4 Street views of Hancheng Ancient City, Pingyao Ancient City and Liaocheng Ancient City
(Image source: Photographed by the author)
04
The transformation trend of the "separation of the old and the new" model
The dividends of the era of "developing new cities to protect old cities" are gone, and if the operation of the "separation of old and new" mode in the era of refined governance wants to break through the bottleneck of efficiency, it is necessary to take care of the immediate needs of the market and society at the medium and micro scale. Accordingly, the "separation of the old and the new" model should be encouraged to carry out endogenous innovation, and at the same time, the higher-level government should also do a good job in policy incentives, supervision and guidance. For the specific affairs involved in the "separation of the old and the new" model, the boundary between public and private rights should be flexibly adjusted according to the differences in practical scales.
4.1 Macro scale: grasp development opportunities and coordinate the relationship between the old and the new
The macro practice of the "separation of old and new" model towards sustainable development depends on the comparative advantages of the new city and the old city in each region. The new city and the old city should not stay in the relationship of "mirror images" of each other, but truly establish a "polycentric structure" with the organic linkage of personnel, functions, information, facilities, systems and other elements. For the development of new towns, it should be recognized that the increase of development capacity is not the ultimate goal of the transfer of development rights, and it is important to get out of the path dependence of land finance and explore new production functions as soon as possible. For the protection of the old city, it is necessary to optimize the structure and boost the vitality without destroying the historical features, and pursue the integration and mutual promotion of the meanings of "people, culture, land, industry and scenery". For the overall urban design, post-modernist design techniques can be considered in the future to highlight the two themes of "development" and "protection", and form a good aesthetic interaction in the landscape.
4.2 Mesoscopic scale: improve the compilation of control regulations and enhance the authority of the system
To optimize the meso-practice of the "separation of the old and the new" model, we can start by improving the regulatory detailed planning and exploring the (secondary) development right transfer mechanism. There is too much discretion in the adjustment and review of the regulatory detailed planning in mainland China, resulting in many situations of "extrapolating the development floor area ratio based on the actual situation of land transfer" in specific projects, which is a potential threat to the credibility of the regulatory detailed planning and an obstruction to the introduction of the market mechanism into the transfer of secondary development rights. The main points of the preparation of the regulatory detailed plan should be moved from "planning" to "rules", and the nature of the secondary development right can also be appropriately transitioned from "public power" to "public property right": on the one hand, it is necessary to strengthen the standardization of the preparation and implementation, and prudently determine the base of various economic and technical indicators; On the other hand, drawing on mature international experience, it is necessary to comprehensively consider the influence of factors such as differential land rent and public services, and establish a systematic and rigorous evaluation procedure for the valuation of development rights as soon as possible, and set incentive rules that take into account both public and private interests (Figure 5).
Fig.5 Athens urban cadastral and land development rights management system
(Image source: http://gis.epoleodomia.gov.gr/v11/index.html.)
4.3 Micro scale: guide the sinking of governance through multi-party cooperation
The micro practice of the "separation of the old and the new" model in the era of stock will inevitably face the problem of rights restriction and compensation for private architectural heritage. At present, local governments are unable to impose strict administrative management on some privately owned historic buildings, and it is difficult to clarify the legal relationship between public rights (development rights) and private rights (housing property rights). In this case, Hong Kong, China, which also implements the "public ownership of land" and "lease approval system", adopts a "case-by-case" approach of public-private negotiation, establishes a public participation mechanism that includes the proposal stage and the trial stage, and implements the main responsibility of protection through government acquisition, enterprise claim, and land bundle and transfer[21]. This may have two implications for the mainland region: one is to retain a moderate degree of institutional flexibility, which not only recognizes the private nature of historical buildings, but also advocates the necessity of public intervention; The second is to focus on multi-party cooperation and partnerships, and gradually sink the focus of space governance to the grassroots level. The mode of operation is generally as follows: under the guidance and supervision of the government, the enterprise and the public complete the consultation and negotiation of detailed matters.
05
Conclusion
As a creative practice rooted in the local historical and institutional background, the "separation of the old and the new" model answers the dilemma of "development or protection" of famous cities in an ingenious way. In the face of the new situation of social and economic development, the "separation of old and new" model still needs to explore new coping methods in the following directions: (1) grasp the difference in scale, and the middle and micro scale is the optimization focus of the practice of "separation between the old and the new"; (2) Coordinate the relationship between the old and the new, and the development of famous cities should avoid falling into a passive situation of "taking care of one and losing the other"; (3) "Balancing public and private interests", the protection of famous cities should be the result of the coupling of "government initiative", "market response" and "citizen consciousness". With the deepening of the reform of the land rights system in mainland China, the transformation process of the elements of the "separation of the old and the new" model and its institutionalization path are becoming more and more clear. In time, the "separation of the old and the new" model is no longer just the exclusive blueprint concept of planners, and the "separation of the old and the new" model towards refined governance will inevitably affect the joint participation of multiple subjects and even the overall progress of urban civilization.
Notes & References (scroll up to see all)
Exegesis:
(1) Shadow land price refers to "the maximum benefit that can be exerted by land use under the constraints of limited resources".
(2) Refer to the two-level land development right system constructed by Lin Jian and other scholars: the first-level development right is implicit in the administrative allocation of governments at all levels, and the second-level development right is implicit in the land use planning permission.
(3) The boundaries between the new city and the old city are based on the natural boundary or administrative boundary.
Bibliography:
[1] Zhang J, Ding Zhigang. Integrate the protection and inheritance of history and culture into urban and rural construction[J].Masses,2023(04):10-11.)
[2] Chao Ge, Kim Annie. On the protection of historic urban areas under the mode of "separation of old and new":Based on the observation of the old city of Hancheng[J].Journal of Nanjing Institute of Technology(Social Sciences),2022,22(01):13-21.)
[3] Zhao Yanjing. Beijing Planning and Construction,2017(04):161-166.
[4] Wang Ruizhu. Urban Planning Journal,1992(03):54-59.)
[5] Wu Liangyong. Urban Planning Journal,1983(06):2-12+35.
[6] Long Ying, Zhou Yin. Planner,2016,32(02):135-139.)
[7] Li Hao. Liang Chen Scheme" and "Luoyang Model": A Comparative Analysis and Enlightenment of the Old and New City Planning Models[J].International Urban Planning,2015,30(03):106-116.)
[8] Liang Sicheng, Chen Zhanxiang. Shenyang:Liaoning Education Press,2005.
[9] Long Ying, Zhou Yin. Planner,2016,32(02):135-139.)
[10] Zhang Jingxiang, Luo Zhendong. Nanjing:Southeast University Press,2013.
[11] Li Hao. Urban Planning,2019,43(07):83-91.)
[12] Li Dongquan, Wang Ying, Li Xuewei. Research on the diffusion of urban planning and construction management policies from the perspective of central-local relations: a case study of the protection and urban design of famous historical and cultural cities[J].Urban Development Research,2021,28(03):77-84.)
[13] Huangshan Municipal People's Government. Urban master plan of Huangshan City (2008-2030) (revised in 2018)[Z]. 2018.
[14] Zhou Li'an.Administrative 发包制[J].Society, 2014, 34(06):1-38.
[15] Zhang Yang, He Yi. Research process, characteristics and trends of famous historical and cultural cities:Data visualization analysis based on CiteSpace[J].Urban Planning Journal,2020,44(06):73-82.)
[16] Perperidou D, Siori S, Doxobolis V, etc. Transfer of development rights and cultural heritage preservation: a case study at Athens Historic Triangle, Greece[J]. Heritage,2021, 4:4439-4459.
[17] Chen Baifeng. Legal Research,2012,34(04):99-114.)
[18] Liu Minxia. The implementation dilemma and countermeasures of the transfer system of development rights for the protection of historical features:A case study of Shanghai[J].Shanghai Urban Planning,2016(05):50-53.)
[19] Zhang Jingxiang, Wu Lianglong, Ma Runchao. Urban Planning Journal,2008(06):55-60.)
[20] Liu Lin'an, Wang Shusheng. Re-understanding of the protection mode of "separation of old and new" in famous historical and cultural cities: a case study of Hancheng and Pingyao[J].Journal of Xi'an University of Architecture and Technology(Natural Science Edition),2002(01):76-79.)
[21] Hou Jun, Chen Hanyun, Meng Qinghe, et al. Multi-dimensional analysis and optimization strategy of Hong Kong development right transfer to protect private historic buildings[J].Urban Planning International,2022,37(02):129-136.)
*This article is the paper of the 2023 China Urban Planning Annual Conference
【Disclaimer】The content published on this official account is only for learning and communication, and is not for profit in any form. The copyright of the content belongs to the original author. If there is any infringement of your rights and interests, please contact us in time, and we will negotiate copyright issues or delete the content as soon as possible. The content is the author's personal opinion and does not represent the position of this official account and is responsible for its authenticity.
You might also want to watch these
Meetings | The 2023 Annual Conference of the Historical and Cultural City Planning Branch of the Urban Planning Society of China was successfully held
Focusing on the "Innovative Path for the Protection and Inheritance of Ancient Capitals in the New Era", the "2022 Xi'an Forum" of the Academic Committee of Historical and Cultural City Planning of the Urban Planning Society of China was successfully held
Exploration of the Protection Planning of Famous Historical and Cultural Cities in the New Era: A Case Study of Luoyang