洛杉矶城市设计导则（全英文原版）（389页）.pdf

《洛杉矶城市设计导则（全英文原版）（389页）.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《洛杉矶城市设计导则（全英文原版）（389页）.pdf（389页珍藏版）》请在佰策地产文库上搜索。

1、Urban DesignThis page intentionally left blank Urban DesignAlex Krieger and William S.Saunders,EditorsUniversity of Minnesota Press|Minneapolis|LondonThis book is a collaborative project between the University of Minnesota Press and Harvard Design Magazine.Most of the essays published here previousl

2、y appeared in Harvard Design Magazine,Harvard University Graduate School of Design.Peter G.Rowe,Dean,19922004;Alan Altshuler,Dean,20057;Mohsen Mostafavi,Dean since 2008.Thanks to coordinator Meghan Ryan for her work on Harvard Design Magazine.Every effort has been made to obtain permission to reprod

3、uce the illustrations in this book.If any acknowledgment has not been included,we encourage copyright holders to notify the publisher.Copyright 2009 by the Regents of the University of MinnesotaAll rights reserved.No part of this publication may be reproduced,stored in a retrieval system,or transmit

4、ted,in any form or by any means,electronic,mechanical,photocopying,recording,or otherwise,without the prior written permission of the publisher.Published by the University of Minnesota Press111 Third Avenue South,Suite 290Minneapolis,MN 55401-2520http:/www.upress.umn.eduLibrary of Congress Catalogin

5、g-in-Publication Data Urban design/Alex Krieger and William S.Saunders,editors.p.cm.Includes bibliographical references and index.ISBN 978-0-8166-5638-7(hc:alk.paper)ISBN 978-0-8166-5639-4(pb:alk.paper)1.City planning.I.Krieger,Alex,1951 II.Saunders,William S.III.Harvard Design Magazine.NA9040.U677

6、2009 711.4dc22 2008042230Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paperThe University of Minnesota is an equal-opportunity educator and employer.18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1Contents vii Introduction:An Urban Frame of Mind Alex Krieger Origins of an Urban Design Sens

7、ibility 3 The First Urban Design Conference:Extracts 15 The Emergence of Urban Design in the Breakup of CIAM Eric Mumford 38 The Elusiveness of Urban Design:The Perpetual Problem of Defi nition and Role Richard Marshall Perspectives on a Half-Century of Urban Design Practice 61 Urban Design at Fifty

8、:A Personal View Denise Scott Brown 88 Fragmentation and Friction as Urban Threats:The Post-1956 City Fumihiko Maki 101 The Way We Were,the Way We Are:The Theory and Practice of Designing Cities since 1956 Jonathan Barnett Territories of Urban Design Practice 113 Where and How Does Urban Design Happ

9、en?Alex Krieger 131 Defi ning the Urbanistic Project:Ten Contemporary Approaches Joan Busquets 135 Beyond Centers,Fabrics,and Cultures of Congestion:Urban Design as a Metropolitan Enterprise Richard Sommer Debates about Mandates and Purpose 155 The End(s)of Urban Design Michael Sorkin 183 Bad Parent

10、ing Emily Talen 186 Facts on the Ground:Urbanism from Midroad to Ditch Michelle Provoost and Wouter Vanstiphout Expanding Roles and Disciplinary Boundaries 201 A Third Way for Urban Design Kenneth Greenberg 208 Urban Design after Battery Park City:Opportunities for Variety and Vitality Timothy Love

11、227 The Other 56 Charles Waldheim 237 Democracy Takes Command:New Community Planning and the Challenge to Urban Design John Kaliski Challenges for the Unprecedented Phenomena of Our New Century 255 Designing the Postmetropolis Edward W.Soja 270 Unforeseen Urban Worlds:Post-1956 Phenomena Peter G.Row

12、e 285 Urban Design Looking Forward Marilyn Jordan Taylor 291 Urban Design Now:A Discussion 327 Contributors 331 IndexviiIt was divine nature which gave us the country,and human skill that built the city.Marcus Terentius Varro,fi rst century BCTwo millennia following Varro,as the worlds urban populat

13、ion surpasses three billion,city-building skills are more important than ever.We are becoming an urban species to a degree unimaginable as recently as a third of a century ago,when only one out of three people dwelled in cities.Today they we are the majority,growing worldwide at more than one millio

14、n per week.1 The knowledge required to address such urbanization is,of course,spread among many disciplines and areas of knowledge.This collection of essays examines the contribution of the varied enterprises that can be collected under the umbrella of“urban design.”Far from coalescing into a singul

15、ar set of activities,urban design has,over the half century that it gained autonomy from its progeni-tor design and planning disciplines,evolved less as a technical disci-pline than as a frame of mind shared by those of several disciplinary foundations committed to cities and to improving urban ways

16、 of life.This I consider its strength,though not everyone concurs with such Introduction:An Urban Frame of MindAlex Kriegerviii|Alex Kriegera sweeping,some would say vague,view of urban design.There are those for whom urban design represents a very particular set of skills,specifi c areas of profess

17、ional focus,and even a particular“look.”But no singular defi nition of urban design is broadly shared.2The absence of a simple defi nition remains a conceptual hurdle for some.How,they ask,can any enterprise perform its fundamental role,much less gain broad social status and responsibilities,without

18、 being able to explicitly describe its essential purpose?There is con-siderable skepticism,even in this volume dedicated to urban design,about the very possibility of“designing”cities or substantial parts of them.Each essayist wrestles with this dilemma,acknowledging the inherent diffi culties of de

19、signing urbanity,while remaining commit-ted to that goal.The eighteen essays in this volume were commissioned over several years,with four written as commentary on the others,which were fi rst published in two consecutive issues of Harvard Design Magazine in 2006 and 2007.A number of the essays rely

20、 on the infl uential 1956 conference on urban design,held at Harvards Graduate School of Design,as a point of departure to offer perspective on the intellectual distances traveled since 1956.The essays,along with excerpts of the 1956 conference proceed-Art2Architecture,EDAW,Tadao Ando Architects,and

21、 Ove Arup,Piccadilly Gardens,Manchester,England,2001.Copyright EDAW.Photograph by Dixi Carrillo.ix|Introductionings and a transcript of a discussion on urban design held at Harvard in 2006,are organized into six parts.While each essay touches on many themes and is not easily categorized,the purpose

22、of the loose grouping is to highlight key issues about the nature of urban design.Among the themes that recur across the essays,I would highlight the following three as central to current debates around urban design practice.Changing Disciplinary AllegiancesThe modern concept of urban design grew ou

23、t of still familiar mid-twentieth-century concerns:urban sprawl at city peripheries and decay in aging central areas.A goal was to fi nd“common ground”among the design disciplines(namely architecture and urban planning)for dealing with the kinds of exasperating problems that are beyond the mastery o

24、f any single design discipline.However,most agree some enthusiastically and others with reservations that urban design has largely been the domain of urban-minded architects.The proponents of this view argue that since giving shape to urban space and settlement is an essential task of urban design,i

25、t requires an architects training.3 Still,as the planning profession increasingly re engages physical planning,which it more or less abandoned for a generation,its claims on urban design grow.And physical planning,planners say,involves many issues that,while carrying spatial impli-cations,are not at

26、 heart architectural,so an architecture-dominated approach to urban design is limiting.Meanwhile the public at large,with their everyday concerns like housing affordability,traffi c calm-ing,neighborhood enhancement,and containment of development,sees urban design as a friendlier,less abstract conce

27、pt than planning(which has never fully shed its urban renewalera reputation as a top-down approach to problem solving)and so demands good urban de-sign from its public planners.But,as several of the essayists write,the most recent and radical(in view of the prior half century)relationship being forg

28、ed is with landscape architecture.Urban and landscape design have generally been viewed as separate,if not confl icting,activities.The initial cadre of self-described urban designers,primarily architects,viewed urban design as at the intersection of planning and architecture,where it would mediate a

29、nd overcome the perceived gaps between the two.x|Alex KriegerThe goals of landscape architects were seen as peripheral and over time were even accused of facilitating decentralizing tendencies and suburbanization.Urban design,many believed,had to concern itself primarily with the tougher mandates of

30、 Modern architecture and its transformative urban manifestos,not with the softer art of designing with natural things or fostering kindness to ecosystems.4An emerging generation of designers calling themselves landscape urbanists questions the supposition that urban design insight is the prerogative

31、 of architectural form-making sensibilities alone and asks,“Isnt the landscape the real glue of the modern metropolis?”This startling proposition becomes less revolutionary the moment one tours virtually any contemporary metropolitan area from the air to observe the small proportion of building as c

32、ompared to landscape.We are no longer building the solid city represented in fi gure-ground plans in which open space is what is left where there are no buildings,or what is shaped by surrounding built form.While still somewhat vague in methodology and projects,the promise of landscape urbanism is p

33、ower-ful,since it promotes a logical integration of land use,environmental stewardship,and place making.The increasing intellectual claims on urban design from urban planning and especially from landscape architecture present the most fascinating recent developments for the fi eld.Given the complexi

34、ties of urbanization,the placing of urban design concerns closer to the center of each of the design disciplines is promising and in a belated way fulfi lls the instincts(if not the actions)of the urban design pio-neers of a half century ago.Conversely,the increased attention to mat-ters of urban de

35、sign has forced the fi eld to become alert to more aspects of the social and natural sciences,to transportation and civil engi-neering,water and waste management,zoning and public policy,and other areas earlier considered largely the responsibility of others.Champions of Time-Honored Places and Prin

36、ciples or Agents of Modernization?As you sit near the Piazzetta in Venice,clarity of mind about the pres-ent state of cities or their future may wither.Determined to deny the clarions of sentimentality,you think“What is it precisely about contemporary urbanity that seems so much less satisfying than

37、 the urbanity here?”Is it bigness,not of the entire city but of its individual xi|Introductionelements?Is it the bifurcation of functions,a lack of overlapping textures and details,the compartmentalization of activities,the in-trusions of the automobile?Is it too much newness or the“lack of human sc

38、ale”?You snap out of it.You are in Venice,a city besieged by tourists and short on residents.The local economy is based on visitors capital.The air quality is poor.The water smells and looks nasty.The city is sinking.It is sustainable due only to human stubbornness,not any contemporary criteria of e

39、nvironmental sustainability.Ah,but it is so beautiful!Such vacillation between wishing to perpetuate the venerable urban condition and a clear-headed response to contemporary needs(with-out refl exive reference to“the good old days”)exemplifi es the dialec-tical nature of urban design.Consider the m

40、eaning of new as a prefi x to urbanism,as in the cur-rently popular“New Urbanism.”Those unfamiliar with the phrase may surmise that it is a call for a new kind of urbanism,something bold and unprecedented,as sought by the leaders of the Modern Movement in the early twentieth century.For the New Urba

41、nists what is referred to by the new is a renewed appreciation for traditional urbanism,a return to urbanism on the part of those disillusioned by the suburbs.To others the new in New Urbanism might refer to a repositioning of urbanism,an acceptance(in the face of overwhelming evidence)that low dens

42、ity,peripheral spread,motorized mobility,and decentralized functions are here to stay.Thus,the new can refer to unique condi-tions of contemporary urbanism:shopping malls,offi ce parks,“edge cities,”theme retail and entertainment complexes,and other such his-torically unfamiliar environments that mu

43、st be addressed creatively rather than dismissed as aberrations.One might surmise that such diversity of meaning was intended by whoever invented the term New Urbanism and is responsible for its success as a slogan.It combines the allure of the new with an opposite tendency:keeping what is less new

44、but more comforting.Demand for the new in city making is not very common(except for improvement in standards of living),and when it appears,it is more equivocal rela-tive to change in form.Change is exciting and unsettling.Indeed,a culture assaulted by new products,technologies,and lifestyles seeks

45、antidotes to change in other spheres of life.Traditionally,our homes and neighborhoods have offered respite from unrelenting external change.It is understandable that an era of ever-hastening innovation xii|Alex Kriegerin business,technology,and commerce engenders a romanticized view of old places a

46、nd ways of living.Thus,urban designers can fi nd themselves trapped between two societal expectations:be guardians of what is best about traditional urbanism,yet also help orchestrate our urban futures by creatively responding to contemporary conditions.Conveying Expertise in an Era of Decentralized

47、 Decision MakingUrban design is seldom an individuals art or a stage for soloists,and project authorship is fundamentally unimportant.The most impor-tant clients for urban design services are not always the most visible or the ones paying the bills.Remaining unaware of or unsympathetic to such condi

48、tions is not uncommon among those who come at urban design from too narrow a designers perspective.Certainly insight and imaginative response to urban problems are needed and prized,but confusing these with unilateral orchestration of a design vision does not often help advance an urban design idea;

49、indeed,it often leads to frustration.Some of the skepticism about the value or possi-bility of urban design comes from those for whom compromise is diffi cult.Pursuing any development or neighborhood plan today involves working with a myriad of actors beyond professional collaborators during plannin

50、g and design phases.These include direct abutters,surrounding neighbors,elected offi cials,public agencies,opponents(often),investors,fi nancial institutions,and regulators,all billed as“stakeholders.”Navigating the shoals created by cadres of stake-holders is perhaps the greatest challenge to pursu