自容積獎勵制度施行以降，容積獎勵一直係都市更新手段中重要之誘因，但公、私部門間對於容積獎勵之目的並不一致，以致於容積發展超出地區容受力，逐漸成為都市發展之問題。
就現行之容積獎勵制度主要仍以都市更新單元內之「單元整體規劃設計」做為獎勵評核之主要考量，對於更新單元周邊環境貢獻度較為薄弱，因此實施都市更新之美意與容積獎勵之本意受到質疑與挑戰。
本研究將利用地理資訊系統及政府統計數據做為研究之基礎進行現況設施容受力之調查與分析，並透過台北市公劃之277處都市更新地區做為實證區進行設施容受力評估，以檢視現行之都市更新容積獎勵制度對都市更新地區造成之衝擊與損益。
利用台北市的居住人口與活動人口對於公共設施的需求進行現況設施容受力之分析，再將台北市全市之允建容積與都市更新地區之獎勵容積分別做為未來實施都市更新事業後之設施容受力推估基礎，配合人口需求予以量化公共設施與容積增加之關係。本研究將分析結果透過容積總量管控的概念與推估後認為，全市之容積開發與公共設施興闢之比例為0.75時，即可在開發容積之餘維持設施容受力之承載力。
透過本研究的現況分析與都市更新地區之設施容受力推估，可將台北市之容積發展與公共設施面積之關係給予量化基準。未來公部門對於轄內之都市更新地區的容積管控與獎勵標準可根據本研究之概念加以研擬彈性的都市發展策略，以提升都市環境品質。
Since its implementation, floor area ratio (FAR) incentives have become the main driving force behind urban renewal methods. However, there are inconsistencies between public and private FAR objectives, causing FAR developments to exceed local capacities and become an increasingly serious issue in urban development.
The major assessment indicator for existing FAR policies is still based on the Overall Unit Planning and Design of the Urban Regeneration Agency. This indicator contributes little towards the peripheral environment of new urban development projects. As a result, the FAR policies pose a serious challenge towards urban renewal aesthetics and the original motive of FAR incentives.
Our study shall utilize a geographical data system as well as government statistics as a basis for investigating and analyzing facility carrying capacities. We carried out actual assessments of facility carrying capacity of 277 publicly designated urban renewal districts in Taipei City in order to inspect the impacts and losses incurred as a result of current FAR incentive policies for urban renewal.
Public infrastructure demands of the resident and economically active populations of Taipei City were used to analyze current facility carrying capacities. Total allowable FAR of Taipei City and FAR incentives of urban renewal districts were then used for estimating future facility carrying capacities after completing the planned urban development projects. The estimates were corroborated with population needs in order to quantify the relationship between demands in public facilities and increasing FAR. These results were then used to provide estimations for conceptual scenarios where total FAR was under control. We found that a bearable facility carrying capacity could still be maintained at a FAR development and public facility provision ratio of 0.75.
Our analyses of the current situation and estimates of facility carrying capacities in urban renewal districts showed that it would be possible to provide a quantifiable standard for the relationship between FAR development and the area of public infrastructure in Taipei City. Public departments may utilize the concepts raised in our study to review FAR controls and incentive standards of urban development zones under their jurisdiction in order to formulate flexible urban development strategies and improve the quality of urban environments.
