面向全域全要素的广州市国土空间规划传导体系研究

建立科学清晰的传导体系是保障规划治理效力的重要前提。随着全国各层级国土空间规划编制与改革的推进，空间规划体系雏形初显，明确各级、各类规划编制内容、管理权限和传导路径，已成为各级政府十分关切的问题。文章基于广州国土空间规划试点的编制实践，针对原有规划体系中指标分解难、控制线管控标准不一、用地管控尺度和精度不一、设施管控缺乏分级等问题，以全域全要素管控为目标，提出了广州建立“四级三类”规划传导体系及实施评估监督的建议，认为一是要在纵向传导上，强化规划编制和“市—区—街道”行政管理体系的衔接，构建“市域—区—单元—地块”4个纵向传导层级，重点围绕“目标战略、底线管控、功能与用地管控、设施管控”4类核心管控内容明确各层级编制内容和深度；二是要在横向传导上，构建专项规划与各层级规划的“联系-反馈”机制，推进专项规划与总体层面规划同步编制，达成管控要求、核心指标等方面的共识，并加强详细规划层面的设施评估反馈，细化详细规划在指标、名录、位置、结构4个方面的传导要求。

The Territorial Spatial Planning Transmission System of Guangzhou Comprising the Entire Area and All Elements

Establishing a rational and clear territorial spatial planning implementation system is key to ensuring governance effectiveness. Following the formulation of territorial spatial planning at all levels, the planning system, from the perspective of formulation, has already been formed. However, from the perspective of implementation, neither holistic research nor empirical case studies have been discussed thoroughly. On the basis of Guangzhou's territorial spatial planning, this paper analyzes the problems underlying the existing planning system. To achieve the goals of all regions and elements that are covered by spatial planning, this paper puts forward suggestions for the implementation system based on the integration of duty, system, and content, which raises the targeting advices on Guangzhou's planning system,including four vertical transmission levels of "City-district-unit-plot", as well as the horizontal coordination of overall level planning, detailed level planning and special planning. It aims to provide a reference for other cities. The major conclusions of this paper are as follows. First, under the vertical implementation aspect among all levels of planning, integration with the "city-district-town" administrative system should be reinforced. To this end, the vertical planning implementation system of the "city-district-unit-lot" should be formed. Moreover, the contents of implementation should focus largely on objectives, control lines, land use, and public facilities. To be specific, the objectives from overarching strategies should be subdivided into sub-strategy indicators and action plans. In terms of control lines, categories of "big three control lines," including ecological protection line, permanent basic farmland protection line, urban growth boundary line; "small three control lines," including green space protection line, water system protection line, historical and cultural protection line; and other natural resource protection lines should have differentiated implementation and control methods. This paper argues that the following three methods should be followed: amount determination with boundary delineated, amount determination with boundary illustrated, and indicators determination with boundary of core elements illustrated. In land use management and control, this paper argues that the precision of land use control should be extended from functional policy area to dominant use zoning. Furthermore, development capacity zoning should be emphasized as the basis to promote the compatibility of land use, population, and total floorspace. Last but not the least, public facilities should be allocated according to the three-tier system: city-level, district-level, and community-level. Control guidelines must also be reinforced, which includes facility standards, land boundaries, allocation points, and facility scale. Second, using horizontal implementation, this paper suggests that a "connection-retroaction" mechanism should be established, including special, comprehensive, and detailed planning. Above all, the formulation of special planning should be synchronized with comprehensive planning in order to reach a consensus about planning lists, core planning elements, and collaboration mechanism. Thereafter, the rules to implement special planning among all planning levels should be clear. Detailed standards, indicators, directory, structure, and location implementation should be the major factors in rule setting. Although there are great differences in planning system, organization, and management mode among cities, Guangzhou still has representative significance. It can provide reference for the research and establishment of territorial spatial planning and implementation in China.