A district-level spatial model of demolition pressure on older buildings without designated heritage status, combining public property transaction, occupancy permit and urban renewal data across Taipei’s 12 districts.
Older buildings without heritage designation can face redevelopment pressure. This project uses public datasets to explore that pressure spatially.
Older buildings may carry community memories even without formal heritage designation. Specific international study references from the original narrative require verification and are not presented as evidence here.
Property transactions, occupancy permits and urban renewal cases provide public inputs that can be integrated into a spatial pressure model.
Phase 1 explores the method and data quality at district scale. A possible Phase 2 would refine the analysis to blocks and parcels.
Each indicator is assigned 0–3 points by percentile. The five scores sum to a maximum of 15 and are grouped into five pressure levels.
Use completion dates in transaction records to calculate the share of buildings aged 30+ and 50+ in each district. Higher shares receive higher pressure scores.
Use district mean transaction prices per square metre as a proxy for redevelopment incentives. Higher prices receive higher scores.
Count urban renewal cases in each district using data.taipei records. More cases indicate stronger redevelopment activity.
Count permits issued in the most recent 10-year window from over 8,700 occupancy permit records (ROC years 90–114, equivalent to 2001–2025) as a proxy for rebuilding activity.
Measure the distance from each district centre to the nearest station in the project’s 39-station MRT dataset. Shorter distances receive higher pressure scores.
5 indicators × 3 points = 15 maximum | Very high: 12+; high: 9–11; medium: 6–8; low: 3–5; very low: 0–2
Compare the five indicators to explore the pressure profile of each district.
Unit: points | Maximum: 15 | Darker colors indicate higher pressure | Top 3 have dark borders
Unit: % | Source: completion dates in Ministry of the Interior transaction records
Unit: NTD 10,000 / m² | Source: district mean transaction price
Unit: cases / permits | Source: data.taipei urban renewal cases and occupancy permit summaries
Unit: points (0–3 per indicator) | Source: composite scores for the top 3 districts
Select a district to inspect raw values and scores for all five indicators.
Map: Folium + Leaflet.js | Basemap: OpenStreetMap
Key values for the five districts with the highest composite scores.
Explore 12 districts. Click a column header to sort, or use the search and level filter.
| District | Score | Level | Age 30+ % | Age 50+ % | Median age | Mean price | Renewal cases | Recent permits | Mean floors | Nearest MRT | MRT distance (m) |
|---|
Public data resolution limits this analysis to districts. Scores do not identify the risk of individual buildings.
Public sources often resolve only to districts or blocks and do not provide complete age, ownership and structural information for every building.
Long-held buildings without transactions are excluded. The sample may favour areas with more frequent trading.
Older apartment lanes and new luxury developments can face different pressures within the same district. District aggregates hide these differences.
The five indicators have equal weights (0–3 points each). Expert surveys or AHP-derived weights could refine how the model represents redevelopment decisions.
Address, parcel or cadastral data could support finer block or parcel analysis, with natural hazard and seismic-resistance information added.