访谈话题：城市规划
TOPIC: URBAN PLANNING
参与者Participants _克里斯·范杜恩（合伙人）Chris van Duijn, Partner
拓元强（协理建筑师）John Thurtle, Associate
范杜恩：无论总体规划还是大型商业项目，我们在中国的城市规划项目都面临着我们所说的中国城市规划模式。这种模式是在经济扩张高度紧迫的时期发展起来的，正是这种模式使中国得以以前所未有的速度和规模实现城市化。这种模式是一种全面、综合的蓝图，涵盖了城市规划的各个方面，从交通和道路网络到城市规划和发展，再到政策制定。无论中国的哪个地区，这些政策和标准在地方和国家层面都以类似的方式应用。
由于中国城市化规模巨大，许多城市在未来几年将面临如何保持吸引力的挑战。随着经济社会的快速发展居民的需求和期望发生了变化。人们不再只寻求一个居住的地方，而是想让生活环境具有不同的品质。
拓元强：这一模式也是中国正在规划的数百个“创新城”的基础。但创新行业往往拒绝典型的规划方案。相反，它们追求优先考虑社会因素和环境因素的模式。
范杜恩：典型的中国规划模式的另一个缺点是，没有考虑到中国许多城市所拥有的丰富遗产，也没有考虑到以汽车为基础的城市化所带来的环境问题。网格模式通常忽略了当地地形和现有的生态系统。从我们的角度来看，更有意义的是考虑现有的背景——地形、景观和水文系统、当地文化等。不是单纯为了保护这些，而是为了使其成为未来发展的基础。
成都汽车展这些总体规划里面的大部分内容是单一功能，类型重复。为了创造更可持续的城市发展，我们需要从过去大规模城市发展的成功和失败中吸取教训。当然，那些都是出于当时最好的意图开发的，在短期内运行良好，但快速增长最终导致了饱和。随着我们前进的脚步，使这些地区更具可持续发展性和安居吸引力将是至关重要的。
拓元强：说到考虑现有背景，我们指的不仅仅是今天的情况，还包括过去历史情况。例如，在成都项目中，我们观察了林盘村落，研究这些村庄如何在坡地周围建造。这些村庄与农业、生活和绿地方面有着明显的关系。
范杜恩：我记得我们研究了当地动物和鸟类的栖息地以及当地的水道，绘制了一百年前的地图，并与现在进行了比较。我们可以看到发生了什么变化，以及这些村庄是如何应对变化的。
拓元强：我们将此作为总体规划的起点，从一开始就放弃了网格式规划。在不牺牲交通便利性的情况下，我们创建了一系列聚落，实现了与周围网格相同的密度。这是一项保护环境免受破坏并维护濒危
物种多样性生态系统的策略。此外，还增加了一个文化层面。我们所做的是创建一个能吸引人们参观和探索的城市。
范杜恩：这些聚落采用无车化交通设计，区域内人们的出行无须驾驶汽车住宅社区的设计理念是提供不同的住房类型以及学校、办公楼和其他设施，而不是营造相同的街区。所有这些仍然符合最初总体规划对总建筑面积的要求。
新冠疫情后，我更加强烈地感到，这样的模式为未来的发展带来了潜力。新冠疫情改变了我们看待城市生活的方式。以更自给自足的方式设计的城市模型应该成为我们未来城市的基础。我们也可以模糊城市和乡村之间的界限，到将城市生活的特质与让我们逃
Chris van Duijn (CvD): Whether masterplans or large-scale commercial projects, our urban planning projects in China confront us with what we call the Chinese urban planning model. This model has been developed in a period of high urgency for economic expansion and it is what allowed the country to urbanize at an unprecedented speed and scale. It offers a fully integrated blueprint that encompasses all aspects of urban planning, from traffic and road networks to city programming and development to policy making. These policies and standards are applied in a similar way across the local and national levels, regardless which part of China. Due to the vast scale of China’s urbanizatio
n, many cities will face challenges to maintain their attractiveness in the coming years. Rapid development has led to changes in the demands and expectations of residents. People no longer seek just a place to live but are interested in different qualities of their living environment.
John Thurtle (JT): This model is also the basis for the hundreds of “innovation cities” that are being planned in China. But the innovative industries tend to reject typical planning solutions. Instead, they pursue models that prioritize social and environmental considerations.
CvD: Another shortcoming of the typical Chinese planning model is that it does not consider the rich heritage that many cities in China have, nor the environmental issues posed by car-based urbanization. The grid model typically ignores local topography and existing ecological systems. From our perspective, it is more meaningful to consider the existing context—the topography, green and blue systems, local culture—not per se with the objective to preserve them, but to make them the foundation for any future development.
Large parts of these masterplans are monofunctional with repetitive typologies. To create more sustainable urban developments, we need to learn from the successes and failures of large-scale urban developments from the past. Certainly, they were developed with the best intentions at the tim
e, and worked well in the short run, but the rapid growth eventually led to saturation. As we move forward, it will be crucial to make these areas more sustainable and attractive to live in.
JT: When we talk about considering the existing context, we don’t refer to just what's there today but what has been for hundreds of years. For example, in the Chengdu project we looked at the Linpan villages and how they have been built around slopes. There is a clear relationship between farming, living and green spaces in these villages.
CvD: I recall we studied the habitats for local animals and birds, the local waterways, mapped out everything the way it was one hundred years ago and compared it is now. We could see what changed and how these villages have responded to changes. JT: We took that as a starting point for our masterplan and discarded the grid from the beginning. Without sacrificing mobility, we created a series of clusters that achieved the same density as the surrounding grids. This is a strategy that protects against environmental damage and maintains a diverse eco system for endangered species. And it also adds a cultural dimension. It is about creating a city that gives people a reason to visit and explore.
CvD: We designed the clusters in a way that you can move from A to B without having to drive your c
ar. For the residential neighborhoods the idea was to provide diverse housing typologies together with schools, offices and other amenities, instead of identical blocks. And all was still in line with the GFA of the initial masterplan.
After COVID, I feel more strongly that such a model provides potential for future development. The pandemic has changed the way we appreciate urban life. Urban models designed in a more self-sustainable way should become the basis for our future cities. And
离城市烦嚣的乡村特质相结合的解决方案。
拓元强：我同意。规划不应该仅仅是效率的问题。规划应该出哪些方面需要效率，而剩下的方面，就应该从更人性化的角度出发去设计。如果这些项目被称为“未来科技城”或“创新区”，它们不应该在城市规划方面也尝试一些新的东西吗？
范杜恩：你可以说这是名义上的创新，而不是本质或特性上的创新。这里我们可以把我们在美国或欧洲创新区进行的项目中汲收获到的专业知识带进来。硅谷无疑是创新发展区的标杆。如果我们分析它作为世界上第一个科技中心的成功之处，我们可以得知，硅谷的成功与结构和规划无关，而是恰恰相反地正是因为完全没有这些方面！其关键在于那种相对自由的发展空间，那些公司可以在没有太多约束的情况下自然扩张，同时与其他科技公司或高科技行业距离又很近，另外与高等教育院校有着密切
联系。
创新的突破性想法是通过现实中的互动产生的，因此互动正是我们在独角兽岛项目上希望借助设计带来促进的。该设计所基于的想法，是为人们打造一个兼顾工作和生活功能，此外更是能刺激正式和非正式的社会交流的社区。我们的方案强调集体协同作用，而不是网格模式，因为后者碍于距离，让碰面更花力气。
拓元强：但重要的是，我们不是在制造孤立的“科技乌托邦”。在所有这些项目中，我们努力将新开发融入现有的城市环境和自然环境中，使其与它们的功能相联系并从中受益。我们希望让这些项目能够尽可能地惠及公众的使用。
范杜恩：这就是我们在独角兽岛那个项目中心创建公共的“实况实验室”时的想法。这是一个可供初创企业协同共享办公的工作环境，设有创客实验室和测试设施，还有公共空间，供外来访客体验初创公司的活力。这就像一个“活的博物馆”。我认为这是许多创新开发项目所缺少的。
拓元强：我们经常看到大型科技企业建筑或园区的设计应自上而下的要求采用高调突出的做法。对我们来说，重要的不是追求一种标志性的造型表达，而是要开发一些系统，促进企业的发展和人的交往。通过这种方法，建筑表现自然而然就产生了。
范杜恩：我认为这是中国在规划方面可以更有远见的地方，与此同时保持着一些让世界各地新经济都向其学习的政策。我们面对的这一代人对自己的未来有着不同的期望。这不再仅仅依靠建筑师和城市规划师的智慧，还需要政策制定者的勇气——他们要与开发商合作，探索不同方向，无惧于超越项目的界限去思考。
we can also blur the division between city and countryside to find solutions that combine the qualities of urban city life with those of the places we go to escape the city.
JT: I agree. Planning shouldn’t be a just a matter of efficiency. It should identify what aspects of planning require efficiency, and otherwise come from a more human perspective. If these projects are called “future tech cities” or “innovation districts,” shouldn’t they also try something new in terms urban planning?
CvD: You can argue that it is innovation in name, not in its nature or character. This is where we can bring in our expertise from working on innovative districts in the US or Europe. The benchmark for innovation zones is of course the Silicon Valley. If we analyze its success as the world’s first tech hub, we can conclude that it had nothing to do with structure and planning, but rather their complete absence. What mattered was the relative freedom for these companies to grow naturally without too
many limitations, and their proximity to other tech firms or high-tech industries, as well as their close ties to high-level education.
Groundbreaking ideas happen through physical interaction, which is what we sought to facilitate through the Unicorn project. The design is based on the notion of a community where you work and live, but more than that, one that stimulates social exchange, formally and informally. The scheme emphasizes collective synergy, as opposed to the grid model, where meeting requires greater effort due to distance.
JT: But it’s important to say that we’re not creating isolated tech utopias. In all these projects we strive to integrate the new development into the existing urban and natural context, to be connected to and informed by how they function. We want to make them as accessible as possible to the public.
CvD: This is what we had in mind when we created a public "Living Lab" in the center of the Unicorn project. It’s a place where start-ups can operate in coworking environments, with makers labs and test facilities, mixed with public programs for visitors from the outside to experience the energy of the start-ups. It’s like a “living museum.” I think this is what is missing in a lot of innovation developments.
JT: We often see grand gestures being applied to giant tech buildings or campuses in a top-down way. What’s important to us is not to pursue an iconic formal expression but to develop systems that imply growth and human contact. From this approach architectural expression comes naturally.
CvD: I believe this is where China can be more visionary in terms of planning, while keeping with some of its policies that so many new economies around the world can learn from. We are dealing with a generation that has different expectations for their future. It is no longer only about the ingenuity of the architects and urban planners but also the courage of policymakers working together with developers to explore different directions, without being afraid to think beyond the boundaries of the project.