7 principles for building better cities | Peter Calthorpe | TED

譯者: Lilian Chiu 審譯者: Helen Chang

讓我為我們現在的處境 再增加一些複雜度。

在我們想辦法處理氣候變遷的同時，

我們也要為三十億人建造城市。

So, let me add to the complexity

of the situation we find ourselves in.

也就是要把都市環境再增加一倍。

At the same time that we're solving for climate change,

如果我們沒有做對，

世界上所有的氣候解決方案 可能也無法拯救人類，

we're going to be building cities for three billion people.

因為我們形塑城市的方式， 具有很大的影響力：

That's a doubling of the urban environment.

不僅影響環境，

If we don't get that right,

還有我們的社會福祉、 我們的經濟活力，

I'm not sure all the climate solutions in the world will save mankind,

我們的社群意識，以及連結性。

because so much depends on how we shape our cities:

我們形塑城市的方式 基本上就是在呈現

not just environmental impacts,

我們想要發揮什麼樣的人性。

but our social well-being,

所以我認為把它做對

our economic vitality,

our sense of community and connectedness.

非常重要。

且在某種程度上，把它做對 也能協助我們解決氣候變遷，

Fundamentally, the way we shape cities is a manifestation

因為，到頭來，這個問題 背後的推手似乎是我們的行為。

of the kind of humanity we bring to bear.

And so getting it right is, I think,

這個問題並不是獨立的， 也不只是埃克森美孚

the order of the day.

And to a certain degree, getting it right can help us solve climate change,

和石油公司要負責。

源頭是我們；我們的生活方式。

because in the end,

it's our behavior that seems to be driving the problem.

我們的生活方式。

在這個故事中有個壞蛋， 叫做蔓延（擴張），

The problem isn't free-floating,

and it isn't just ExxonMobil and oil companies.

我會很坦白來談它。

但，並不是各位或許多人 認為的那種蔓延，

It's us; how we live.

不是指在大都會地區 周邊的低密度發展。

How we live.

There's a villain in this story.

It's called sprawl, and I'll be upfront about that.

其實，任何密度的任何地方 都可能出現蔓延。

But it's not just the kind of sprawl you think of, or many people think of,

蔓延的關鍵特色是會把人隔離。

as low-density development

out at the periphery of the metropolitan area.

它會用經濟飛地

Actually, I think sprawl can happen anywhere, at any density.

及土地用途飛地將人分離。

它會把人和大自然分開。

The key attribute is that it isolates people.

它不容許雜交、互動，

It segregates people into economic enclaves

但這些元素能讓城市變好，

讓社會繁榮。

and land-use enclaves.

It separates them from nature.

所以我們應該好好思考 蔓延的解藥是什麼，

It doesn't allow the cross-fertilization,

特別是在我們要承擔 這個重大的建造計畫時。

the interaction,

that make cities great places

and that make society thrive.

讓我帶大家看一個模擬演練。

So the antidote to sprawl is really what we all need to be thinking about,

我們為加州開發出了這個模型，

讓他們在減少碳排放 方面能有所進展。

especially when we're taking on this massive construction project.

我們做了各種加州 可能發生的成長情境，

So let me take you through one exercise.

We developed the model for the state of California

這只是其中一個過度簡化的情境。

so they could get on with reducing carbon emissions.

我們混合了不同的發展原型，

We did a whole series of scenarios for how the state could grow,

假設要處理的目標是在 2050 年時

加州會增加一千萬新成員。

and this is just one overly simplified one.

We mixed different development prototypes

其中一個原型就是蔓延， 更多的如出一轍：

and said they're going to carry us through the year 2050,

購物中心、分區、辦公園區。

另一個原型的重點是， 並非人人都搬到城市中，

10 million new crew in our state of California.

只是緊實的發展，即我們 以前所謂的有軌電車郊區，

And one was sprawl.

It's just more of the same: shopping malls, subdivisions,

走得到的鄰里，低樓層，

但卻是多用途的整合環境。

office parks.

The other one was dominated by, not everybody moving to the city,

而結果十分驚人。

but just compact development,

驚人的原因不只是因為

what we used to think of as streetcar suburbs,

把城市建設習慣 做一點小轉變就能帶來

walkable neighborhoods,

low-rise, but integrated, mixed-used environments.

這麼大的差異，

也是因為每個鄰里都代表 一個特殊的利益團體，

And the results are astounding.

They're astounding not just for the scale of the difference

這些特殊利益團體以往倡導 他們關心的議題時必須要

of this one shift in our city-making habit

一個一個來。

它們以往沒有看見

but also because each one represents a special interest group,

我所謂都市形式的「共同利益」：

讓它們可以與其他人結合。

a special interest group that used to advocate for their concerns

比如，土地消耗，

環保人士非常關心這個議題，

one at a time.

They did not see the, what I call, "co-benefits" of urban form

農民也很關心；

有各種人，當然，還有希望 附近有開放空間的鄰里團體。

that allows them to join with others.

So, land consumption:

蔓延版的加州

environmentalists are really concerned about this,

會讓都市實體足跡變成近兩倍。

so are farmers;

there's a whole range of people,

溫室氣體：大量減少，

and, of course, neighborhood groups that want open space nearby.

因為加州最大的碳排放來源是汽車，

The sprawl version of California

almost doubles the urban physical footprint.

不那麼仰賴汽車的城市

很明顯能大大減少溫室氣體。

Greenhouse gas: tremendous savings,

because in California, our biggest carbon emission comes from cars,

車輛行駛里程數： 這就是我剛才談的。

只要把每戶每年的平均 哩程數減少一萬哩，

and cities that don't depend on cars as much

obviously create huge savings.

原本每戶有兩萬六千五百哩左右，

Vehicle miles traveled: that's what I was just talking about.

不僅對空氣品質和碳 會有很大的影響，

Just reducing the average 10,000 miles per household per year,

也會影響到家庭經濟狀況。

from somewhere in the mid-26,000 per household,

開那麼多哩程數是很昂貴的，

我們已經發現，

has a huge impact not just on air quality and carbon

中產階級要維持生活都很辛苦。

健康照護：我們先前談過 破壞之後要如何修復——

but also on the household pocketbook.

It's very expensive to drive that much,

把空氣清乾淨。

為什麼不停止污染？

and as we've seen,

為什麼不多用步行或騎單車？

the middle class is struggling to hold on.

我們想要打造的城市就這個功能。

Health care: we were talking about how do you fix it once we broke it --

家庭開銷：

clean the air.

Why not just stop polluting?

2008 年是標誌性的一年，

Why not just use our feet and bikes more?

不只是金融業大亂，

And that's a function of the kinds of cities that we shape.

還有我們試圖銷售太多不對的住房：

Household costs:

大面積、單一家庭、距離遠，

2008 was a mark in time,

not of just the financial industry running amok.

昂貴到一般中產家庭無法負擔，

It was that we were trying to sell too many of the wrong kind of housing:

且，老實說，也不再 符合他們的生活方式。

但，為了清庫存，

large lot, single family, distant,

你可以在資金上 打個折扣就把它賣掉。

too expensive for the average middle-class family to afford

我想現實很多情況就是如此。

把成本降低一萬美金——

and, quite frankly, not a good fit to their lifestyle anymore.

別忘了，在加州， 中位數是五萬美金——

But in order to move inventory,

一萬是很高的比例。

you can discount the financing and get it sold.

那只是汽車和水電瓦斯的成本。

I think that's a lot of what happened.

所以，提倡可負擔住房的人， 通常都待在他們的地窖裡，

Reducing cost by 10,000 dollars --

接觸不到環保人士， 接觸不到政治人物，

remember, in California the median is 50,000 --

this is a big element.

That's just cars and utility costs.

每個人都在和每個人爭吵，

他們也開始看見共同目標了，

So the affordable housing advocates, who often sit off in their silos

我認為，其實是 共同目標帶來了改變。

separate from the environmentalists, separate from the politicians,

這些努力的成果包括洛杉磯

現在決定要將該城市做轉變，

everybody fighting with everyone,

now begin to see common cause,

成為更運輸導向的環境。

and I think the common cause is what really brings about the change.

事實上，從 2008 年起，

他們已經透過選票投入 四千億美金在運輸公債上，

Los Angeles, as a result of these efforts,

has now decided to transform itself

新高速公路則一毛錢都沒有。

into a more transit-oriented environment.

好個轉變：

洛杉磯成了步行和運輸的城市，

As a matter of fact, since '08,

they've voted in 400 billion dollars of bonds for transit

而不是汽車的城市。 （掌聲）

這是怎麼發生的？

把最沒有人要的土地，帶狀區域，

and zero dollars for new highways.

在有空間的地方加上運輸，

What a transformation:

接著再填入

LA becomes a city of walkers and transit,

混合用途的開發，

not a city of cars.

能滿足新的住房需求，

(Applause)

How does it happen?

讓它附近既有的鄰里

You take the least desirable land, the strip,

變得更複雜，更有趣，更適合行走。

you add where there's space, transit

and then you infill mixed-use development,

以下是另一種蔓延：

中國，高密度蔓延， 高密度和蔓延聽起來很矛盾，

you satisfy new housing demands

and you make the existing neighborhoods

但，同樣的問題， 車輛禁行區隔開了一切，

all around it more complex,

more interesting, more walkable.

當然，還有剛才談過的驚人霧霾。

Here's another kind of sprawl:

中現在國把 GDP 的 12%

China, high-density sprawl, what you think of as an oxymoron,

花在霧霾對健康的影響上。

but the same problems, everything isolated in superblocks,

當然，和其他地方一樣， 中國城市的歷史很健全。

and of course this amazing smog that was just spoken to.

社區的重點是小型的當地商店、

Twelve percent of GDP in China now is spent

當地的服務、步行、

on the health impacts of that.

和鄰居互動。

The history, of course, of Chinese cities is robust.

聽起來可能像空想，但並不然。 那其實是人民真正想要的。

It's like any other place.

新的車輛禁行區——

Community was all about small, local shops

這些禁行區中有五千個單位，

and local services and walking, interacting with your neighbors.

它們通通都有門禁， 因為大家彼此不認識。

It may sound utopian, but it's not.

當然，那裡甚至沒有人行道，

It's actually what people really want.

The new superblocks --

沒有一樓的店面—— 非常枯燥的環境。

these are blocks that would have 5,000 units in them,

我在其中一個車輛禁行區中 找到這個例子，

and they're gated as well, because nobody knows anybody else.

這裡有人違法在 自家車庫中開設商店，

And of course, there isn't even a sidewalk, no ground floor shops --

這樣他們才能有那種當地服務經濟。

a very sterile environment.

I found this one case here in one of the superblocks

大家已經有慾望想要把它做對。

where people had illicitly set up shops in their garages

我們只需要找規劃師和政治人物。

so that they could have that kind of local service economy.

好，接下來的部分和規劃技術有關。

The desire of people to get it right is there.

重慶市有三千萬人口。

幾乎和加州一樣大。

We just have to get the planners on board and the politicians.

這是一塊小型成長區。

All right. Some technical planning stuff.

他們希望我們去測試

中國數個城市有哪些 蔓延的替代方案。

Chongqing is a city of 30 million people.

這是位四千五百萬人口設計的。

It's almost as big as California.

This is a small growth area.

這張圖要傳遞的訊息是：

They wanted us to test the alternative to sprawl

圖上的每一個圓圈都是運輸站 周圍步行可及的範圍——

in several cities across China.

大量投資地鐵和巴士捷運系統，

This is for four-and-a-half million people.

且分佈的方式能讓每個人

What the takeaway from this image is,

都能步行到運輸站乘車去上班。

every one of those circles is a walking radius

紅色的區域，把它放大來看。

around a transit station --

突然間，我們的原則 帶來了綠色空間，

massive investment in metro and BRT,

保存了重要的生態特色。

and a distribution that allows everybody

to work within walking distance of that.

那裡的其他街道都是無車街道。

The red area, this is a blow-up.

所以，不是推土機鏟平這個地點，

All of a sudden, our principles called for green space

preserving the important ecological features.

在河流上建設，

這種綠色優勢在中國真的不常見，

And then those other streets in there are auto-free streets.

直到這些實做計畫

So instead of bulldozing, leveling the site

在這裡開始進行實驗。

and building right up to the river,

都市紋理（面貌），小型街區， 也許每個街區五百個家庭。

this green edge was something that really wasn't normative in China

他們認識彼此。

街道周邊有商店，

until these set of practices

began experimentation there.

所以有當地的地方可以前往。

而街道本身變小，因為數量變多了。

The urban fabric, small blocks,

maybe 500 families per block.

非常簡單，

直接的都市設計。

They know each other.

The street perimeter has shops

這是我個人的最愛。

so there's local destinations.

想想這邏輯。

And the streets themselves become smaller,

如果只有三分之一的人有車，

because there are more of them.

為什麼要把所有的街道都給汽車用？

Very simple,

straightforward urban design.

如果我們把 70% 的街道

Now, here you have something I dearly love.

Think of the logic.

給其他人使用，禁行汽車，

If only a third of the people have cars,

讓他們的通路很順暢，

why do we give 100 percent of our streets to cars?

他們能夠步行，能騎單車。

為什麼不——

What if we gave 70 percent of the streets

（掌聲）

在我們的循環系統中 納入地理上的公平？

to car-free, to everybody else,

so that the transit could move well for them,

坦白說，城市會運行得更好。

so that they could walk, so they could bike?

Why not have --

不論他們怎麼做，不論他們 在北京建造多少環形道路，

(Applause)

geographic equity

他們就是無法克服 交通完全阻塞的問題。

in our circulation system?

這是一條無車街道， 路邊做混合用途。

And quite frankly, cities would function better.

正下向有運輸系統在運行。

No matter what they do,

no matter how many ring roads they build in Beijing,

我很樂意把下方的運輸 設計為無人駕駛車，但，

they just can't overcome complete gridlock.

也許後續有機會再來談。

So this is an auto-free street, mixed use along the edge.

所以有七項原則現在已經被

It has transit running down the middle.

中國政府的最高階級採納，

I'm happy to make that transit autonomous vehicles,

且他們正在準備實施。

這些原則很簡單， 且我想都是全球通用的。

but maybe I'll have a chance to talk about that later.

So there are seven principles that have now been adopted

第一，保存自然環境、

歷史，以及重要的農業。

by the highest levels in the Chinese government,

and they're moving to implement them.

第二，混合。

And they're simple,

常聽到的是混合用途， 但我說的混合，

and they are globally, I think, universal principles.

我指的是混合收入、混合年齡層，

One is to preserve the natural environment, the history

以及混合土地用途。

and the critical agriculture.

步行。沒有很棒的城市 會讓你不享受在市內步行的。

Second is mix.

Mixed use is popular, but when I say mixed,

你不會去那種地方。

你會選擇的渡假地 會是你能步行的地方。

I mean mixed incomes, mixed age groups

as well as mixed-land use.

為什麼不讓處處都能步行？

單車是我們所知 最有效率的交通工具。

Walk.

There's no great city that you don't enjoy walking in.

中國現在實施的政策是在每條街道上

You don't go there.

The places you go on vacation are places you can walk.

都規劃六公尺的單車道。

他們很認真地想要找回 人人騎單車的歷史。

Why not make it everywhere?

Bike is the most efficient means of transportation we know.

（掌聲）

這是個複雜的規劃師用語：連結。

China has now adopted policies that put six meters of bike lane

它是一種街道網路，

on every street.

會有多條路線，不只一條，

They're serious about getting back to their biking history.

且提供多種類型的街道，不只一種。

(Applause)

Complicated planner-ese here:

交通工具。

connect.

我們得在運輸上投資更多。

It's a street network that allows many routes

沒有萬靈丹。

instead of singular routes

自動駕駛車輛無法 為我們解決這個問題。

and provides many kinds of streets instead of just one.

事實上，它們會產生更多

Ride.

交通流量和車輛行駛哩程， 比其他替代方案更多。

We have to invest more in transit.

焦點。

There's no silver bullet.

城市階層的基礎是運輸

Autonomous vehicles are not going to solve this for us.

As a matter of fact, they're going to generate more traffic, more VMT,

而不是舊式的高速幹道架構。

這是很重大的範式轉變，

than the alternative.

And focus.

但這兩者必須要設法重新連結起來，

We have a hierarchy of the city based on transit

且要真正能夠形塑出城市的結構。

rather than the old armature of freeways.

所以，我抱持很大的希望。

It's a big paradigm shift,

在加州、美國、中國——

but those two things have to get reconnected

這些改變的被接受度很高。

in ways that really shape the structure of the city.

我抱持希望的原因有二。

第一，大部分人能懂。

So I'm very hopeful.

他們了解，好的城市在本質上 能夠／應該是什麼樣子的。

In California, the United States, China -- these changes are well accepted.

第二個原因是，

我們現在能夠運用的分析

I'm hopeful for two reasons.

One is, most people get it.

讓大家能把拼圖拼起來，

They understand intrinsically

讓大家能形成過去 不存在的政治聯盟，

what a great city can and should be.

The second is that the kind of analysis we can bring to bear now

這讓他們能夠實現出 大家都需要的那種社區。

allows people to connect the dots,

謝謝。

（掌聲）

allows people to shape political coalitions

that didn't exist in the past.

That allows them to bring into being the kinds of communities we all need.

克里斯·安德森：所以，好，

自動駕駛汽車， 這裡許多人都很期待它們。

Thank you.

(Applause)

你對它們的顧慮是什麼？

彼得·卡爾索普：我想， 熱度有點太過了。

Chris Anderson: So, OK: autonomous driving, self-driving cars.

首先，大家都說我們 將可以擺脫很多汽車。

A lot of people here are very excited about them.

他們沒有說的是，車輛哩程會大增。

What are your concerns or issues about them?

會有更多車輛在街道上移動。

Peter Calthorpe: Well, I think there's almost too much hype here.

交通會更擁擠。

克：因為很吸引人——

First is, everybody says we're going to get rid of a lot of cars.

你可以邊開車邊閱讀或睡覺。

What they don't say is you're going to get a lot more vehicle miles.

彼：有好幾個理由。 第一，如果它們是私有的。

You're going to get a lot more cars moving on streets.

大家會行駛的距離會更長。

There will be more congestion.

蔓延又會復活。如果你在 去工作的路上就可以工作，

CA: Because they're so appealing --

你可以住在更偏遠的地方。

you can drive while reading or sleeping.

蔓延又會以我十分害怕的方式再現。

PC: Well, a couple of reasons.

One is, if they're privately owned, people will travel greater distances.

計程車：

It'll be a new lease on life to sprawl.

約有 50% 的調查指出 大家不願共享計程車。

If you can work on your way to work,

you can live in more remote locations.

如果不願共享，

It'll revitalize sprawl

結果可能會是 車輛行駛哩程增加 90%。

in a way that I'm deeply frightened.

Taxis:

如果可以共享，

about 50 percent of the surveys say that people won't share them.

車輛行駛哩程仍會增加 30%。

If they don't share them,

克：共享的意思是用智慧的 方式讓許多人同時搭乘——

you can end up with a 90 percent increase in vehicle miles traveled.

彼：是的，就像沒有 方向盤的優步共享。

If you share them,

現實是，提升車輛的效率——

you're still at around a 30 percent increase in VMT.

不論有沒有方向盤 都可以去做，無所謂。

CA: Sharing them, meaning having multiple people riding at once

他們聲稱這是唯一高電效率的 方式，但事實不是如此。

in some sort of intelligent ride-sharing?

PC: Yeah, so the Uber share without a steering wheel.

真正的情況是，步行、 騎單車、大眾運輸

The reality is, the efficiency of vehicles -- you can do it

才能讓城市和社區繁榮。

with or without a steering wheel, it doesn't matter.

把人放到他們的私人泡泡裡，

They claim they're the only ones that are going to be efficient electric,

不論有沒有方向盤，

but that's not true.

But the real bottom line is that walking, biking and transit

是錯的方向。老實說，

自動駕駛汽車前往麥當勞取餐，

are the way cities and communities thrive.

And putting people in their private bubbles,

車上沒有駕駛人，

whether they have a steering wheel or not,

就只是被指派去完成隨機的差事，

is the wrong direction.

And quite frankly,

這影像讓我很害怕。

the image of an AV on its way to McDonald's to pick up a pack

克：謝謝你的說明，你剛才 分享那些混合用途街道的圖像，

非常鼓舞人心，非常美麗。謝謝你。

without its owner,

just being sent off on these kind of random errands

彼：謝謝你。

（掌聲）

is really frightening to me.

CA: Well, thank you for that, and I have to say, the images you showed

of those mixed-use streets were really inspiring, really beautiful.

PC: Thank you. CA: Thank you for your work.

(Applause)