民國106年五月，中央公布「都市危險及老舊建築物加速重建條例」，這是繼民國87年公布的「都市更新條例」，政府針對不動產制定的一項重大法案，台灣因為島型氣候，加上屋齡老舊，許多的房屋已超過耐用年限，在都更條例繁瑣且漫長的作業下，使得房屋更新緩慢，加上原住戶對於條文內容與時間上的不確定性，導致都更曠日費時，危老條例的產生讓不動產活化與社區改造，增添了一道曙光，自106年公布後，申請件數遠遠超過都更的申請件數，唯因為早期的都更條例已為大眾留下固著的印象，在危老條例進行中，亦會遇到許多的問題與困難，成事在人，在民主法治下，唯有了解原住戶的想法，加以溝通協調，才能更有效率的完成人民所期待，本研究旨在針對危老重建對原住戶影響，利用訪談法對原住戶進行危老重建的議題探討，並將訪談資料加以分析與整理，歸納出結論與建議，實研究後，主要原因在於重建時程縮短、手續簡化，尤其是重建後，百分之百回饋原住戶的出發觀點，用以公開透明化的方式來進行重建過程，按照原住家的條件列表，讓住戶能夠明白原始自己房屋的價值，以及可換回的房屋價值與空間，原住戶能自行選擇進行的方式，再者小基地的都更，往往因為利潤而不足，無法受到建商的青睞，經過危老重建整合下，讓小基地亦能有效的被活化，所以在危老重建對原住戶的影響尚，是利多於弊的。

In May 2006, the central government promulgated the " Statute for Expediting Reconstruction of Urban Unsafe and Old Buildings " (reconstruction of urban unsafe and old buildings). A major bill was enacted. Due to the island climate and the aging of the houses, many houses in Taiwan have exceeded their service life. Under the more cumbersome and lengthy work, the renovation of houses is slow, and the original residents are not interested in the content of the provisions. The uncertainty of time and time has made it more time-consuming and time-consuming. The emergence of the Dangerous Elderly Regulations has added a new light to real estate activation and community transformation. Since its publication in 2010, the number of applications has far exceeded the number of applications for Dugen. , it is only because the earlier regulations have left a fixed impression on the public, and many problems and difficulties will be encountered in the implementation of the Dangerous Elderly Regulations. The people’s expectations can be fulfilled more efficiently through communication and coordination. The purpose of this study is to analyze and organize the impact of the reconstruction of the dying on the original residents, and draw conclusions and suggestions, so as to provide relevant units for reference. The main reason is that the reconstruction time is shortened and the procedures are simplified. Especially after the reconstruction, 100% of the original residents' viewpoints are given back, and the reconstruction process is carried out in an open and transparent way. According to the list of conditions of the original residents, the residents can understand the original house. The value of the house, as well as the value and space of the house that can be exchanged, the original residents can choose the way to proceed, and the small bases are more expensive, often because of the lack of profits, and cannot be favored by the builders. The small base can also be effectively activated, so the impact on the original residents in the reconstruction of the dying old is still more pros than cons.

參考文獻
王大鵬 (2008)。對我國城市小型住宅普適性與可變性的研究〔未出版碩士論文〕。西安建築科技大學。
何芳子、丁致成(2006) 。2006日本都市再生密碼—都市更新的案例與制度。財團法人都市更新研究發展基金會。
宋然然 (2010)。既有住宅再生設計模式研究〔未出版碩士論文〕。大連理工大學。
林秀澧、高名孝(2015) 。計劃城事：戰後臺北都市發展歷程。田園城市。
郝飛 (2009)。開放住宅在中國城市住宅演變中的表現及設計手法研究〔未出版碩士論文〕。大連理工大學。
索健、范悅、邱樂 (2012)。當代日本既有住宅再生實踐之觀察。建築學報，8， 104-108。
索健、范悅、布金娜 (2012)。發達國家既有集合住宅再生理論綜述。新建築學報，4
陳哲 (2006)。住宅平面彈性設計初探〔未出版碩士論文〕。天津大學。
清家剛，秋元孝之(2005)。可持續性住宅建設。機械工業出版社。
深尾精一(2000)。日本之支架與填充住宅的建築系統研究。臺灣建築協會開放建築論文集。
彭媁琳、蘇秀慧（2019年 12月 30日）。危老容積獎勵 修法延長五年。中國時報。https://www.chinatimes.com/newspapers/20191230000185-260202?chdtv
賈倍思，王薇瓊(1998)。居住空間適應性設計。東南大學出版社。
劉忠業 (2007)。舊住宅空間改造設計〔未出版碩士論文〕。重慶大學。
羅博. P. 格瑞德茨(2000)。開放建築與彈性——一種協調彈性之供需關係的評量方法。臺灣建築協會開放建築論文集。
Bernard Leupen (2011).The Polyvalence Dwelling. 新建築.
Chris Couch (1990). Urban Renewal: Theory and Practice. Macmillan International Higher Education.
HC SPACE DESIGN(2019)
John Habraken(2002). The Uses of Levels. Open House International.
John Habraken(1999). The Structure of the Ordinary: Form and control in the Built Environment. MIT Press. Cambridge. Mass .
Miles L. Colean (1953). RENEWING OUR CITIES . The Twentieth Century Fund.
Maclennam,D & McGregor,A (1992) .Strategic approaches to urban regeneration in Scotland. Edinburgh:Scottish Homes.
Kendall, S. (2000). Residential open building /Stephen Kendall, Jonathan Teicher.
Kendall, S. (1999). Open building: an approach to sustainable architecture. Journal of Urban Technology, 6(3), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630739983551