| Budget Amount *help |
¥1,900,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,900,000)
Fiscal Year 2006: ¥600,000 (Direct Cost: ¥600,000)
Fiscal Year 2005: ¥1,300,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,300,000)
|
|---|
| Research Abstract |
The authors studied the changes over time in leisure activities in neighboring districts from the standpoint of the characteristics of local residents' activities, with a view toward obtaining the basic information about the plans for leisure facilities having good composite functions and spatial distribution in the districts.
The objective of this study is to clarify the trends of leisure activities in neighboring districts by making a comparative study of changes in leisure activities in two neighboring districts with different characteristics at four time points, or in 1975, 1990, 2000 and 2005, from the following perspectives: the characteristics of local residents' activities, the real conditions of activities in leisure facilities, the conditions of leisure facilities and the distribution of spaces.
Overall living hours and living spaces and the status of leisure activities on the part of residents in different regions were studied and analyzed to ascertain the position, in overall
… More
living activities, of neighborhood leisure facilities that accommodate leisure activities, in order to obtain basic knowledge relating to facility planning (good spatial and functional distributions for neighborhood leisure facilities, etc.) from a temporal and spatial perspective.
The study found that 1) the neighboring districts play a key role for daily leisure activities that have become more multifaceted, 2) the study reveals that amusement, recreation and school facilities in the districts function to provide spaces for the local residents with various preferences to perform a variety of activities, 3) the studies from the viewpoint of the duration of activities reveal that the recreation and school facilities serve as major leisure facilities, 4) neighborhood spaces are the major venue where leisure activities are conducted, 5) there is a definite relationship between leisure activities and facility use distance, and 6) the dispositional characteristics of leisure activities are different for the two locations studied. Less
|
