How we can design timeless cities for our collective future | Vishaan Chakrabarti

譯者: Chloe Choo 審譯者: Helen Chang

Travel with me

跟我一起旅行

to some of the most beautiful spots in cities around the world:

到世界各地一些最美麗的景點：

Rome's Spanish steps;

羅馬的西班牙階梯；

the historic neighborhoods of Paris and Shanghai;

巴黎和上海的歷史性街區；

the rolling landscape of Central Park;

中央公園高低起伏的景觀；

the tight-knit blocks of Tokyo or Fez;

東京或費茲密密麻麻的建築； （註：Fez 是摩洛哥第四大城）

the wildly sloping streets of the favelas of Rio de Janeiro;

里約熱內盧貧民窟陡峭的街道；

the dizzying step wells of Jaipur;

齋浦爾令人眼花繚亂的月亮水井； （Jaipur 是印度拉賈斯坦邦的首府）

the arched pedestrian bridges of Venice.

威尼斯拱形的人行天橋。

Now let's go to some newer cities.

現在，讓我們看一看 一些比較新的城市。

Six downtowns built across six continents in the 20th century.

在 20 世紀，六大洲 所建設的六座城市。

Why do none of these places have any of the charming characteristics

為什麼這些地方都沒有 我們老城區的迷人特色？

of our older cities?

Or let's go to six suburbs built on six continents in the 20th century.

讓我們再看看 20 世紀 在六大洲所建設的六個郊區。

Why do none of them have any of the lyrical qualities

為什麼它們都沒有

任何與我們最珍惜的地方 相關的抒情特質。

that we associate with the places that we cherish the most?

Now, maybe you think I'm just being nostalgic --

也許你認為我只是懷舊，

why does it matter?

它為什麼那麼重要？

Who cares if there is this creeping sameness besetting our planet?

誰在乎這千篇一律的狀態 是否正困擾著我們的地球？

Well, it matters because most people around the world

其實，這很重要，

因為全球絕大多數人口 都正往城市地區遷移。

are gravitating to urban areas globally.

And how we design those urban areas could well determine

而我們設計這些城市地區的方式

能夠精準地決定 作為一個物種的我們能否茁壯成長。

whether we thrive or not as a species.

So, we already know that people who live in transit-rich areas,

我們已經知道 住在方便通勤住房區域的人，

live in apartment buildings,

住在公寓大樓裡，

have a far lower carbon footprint

碳足跡遠比他們相應的郊區低。

than their suburban counterparts.

So maybe one lesson from that is if you love nature,

也許從中得到一個教訓就是， 如果你熱愛大自然，

you shouldn't live in it.

你就不應該住在大自然裡。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

But I think the dry statistics

但我認為，那些枯燥乏味的 公共運輸導向型開發的統計數據

of what's known as transit-oriented development

only tells part of the story.

只說明了故事的一部分。

Because cities, if they're going to attract people,

因為如果城市想要吸引民眾，

have to be great.

就必須要十分優秀。

They have to be powerful magnets with distinctive appeal

它們必須是具有 獨特吸引力的強力磁鐵，

to bring in all those new green urbanites.

來引進那些新的綠色城市居民。

And this is not just an aesthetic issue, mind you.

請注意，這不僅僅是審美問題。

This is an issue of international consequence.

這是一個全球性後果的問題。

Because today, every day,

因為如今，每天都有

literally hundreds of thousands of people are moving into a city somewhere,

成千上萬的人搬到某個城市，

mainly in the Global South.

主要在全球南方。

And when you think about that, ask yourself:

當你想到這一點時，問問自己：

Are they condemned to live in the same bland cities

他們是否注定生活在

我們建於 20 世紀 那些看起來枯燥乏味的城市，

we built in the 20th century,

or can we offer them something better?

還是可以為他們提供更好的環境？

And to answer that question,

要回答這個問題，

you have to unpack how we got here in the first place.

首先你必須了解 我們走到這個地步的過程。

First: mass production.

第一：大量生產。

Just like consumer goods and chain stores,

就像消費品和連鎖店一樣，

we mass-produce glass and steel and concrete and asphalt and drywall,

我們大量生產玻璃、鋼鐵、 混凝土、瀝青和石膏板牆，

and we deploy them in mind-numbingly similar ways across the planet.

然後在全球各地 以類似的方式展開部署。

Second: regulation.

第二：法規。

So, take cars, for instance.

以汽車為例。

Cars travel at very high speeds.

汽車以非常高的速度行駛。

They're susceptible to human error.

它們容易受到人為錯誤的影響。

So when we're asked, as architects, to design a new street,

因此，當身為建築師的我們 被要求設計一條新街道時，

we have to look at drawings like this,

我們需要看著這樣的製圖，

that tell us how high a curb needs to be,

告訴我們緣石的高度，

that pedestrians need to be over here and vehicles over there,

行人和車輛的所在位置，

a loading zone here, a drop-off there.

這裡需要一個卸貨區， 那裡需要一個上下車處。

What the car really did in the 20th century

汽車在 20 世紀真正做到的是，

is it created this carved-up, segregated landscape.

它創造了這種精雕細琢、 隔離的景觀。

Or take the ladder fire truck -- you know, those big ladder trucks

或以雲梯消防車為例——

那些用來把火場中的人們 援救出來的大型梯子卡車——

that are used to rescue people from burning buildings?

Those have such a wide turning radius,

那些消防車的轉彎半徑是如此寬大，

that we have to deploy an enormous amount of pavement, of asphalt,

以致我們必須安排寬大的瀝青路面，

to accommodate them.

來容納他們。

Or take the critically important wheelchair.

或以至關重要的輪椅為例。

A wheelchair necessitates a landscape of minimal slopes

輪椅需要一個最低限度的斜坡

and redundant vertical circulation.

和額外的垂直迴轉空間。

So wherever there's a stair, there has to be an elevator or a ramp.

因此，只要有樓梯， 就必須要有電梯或坡道。

Now, don't get me wrong, please -- I am all for pedestrian safety,

請不要誤解我的意思，

我完全贊成行人安全、消防，

firefighting

and certainly, wheelchair access.

當然，還有無障礙空間。

Both of my parents were in wheelchairs at the end of their lives,

我的父母在生命結束之前 都在輪椅上度過，

so I understand very much that struggle.

所以我非常理解這當中的痛苦。

But we also have to acknowledge that all of these well-intentioned rules,

但我們也必須承認 所有這些善意的規則

they had the tremendous unintended consequence

產生了巨大且意想不到的後果，

of making illegal the ways in which we used to build cities.

導致我們過去建造城市的方式 變得不再合法。

Similarly illegal: at the end of the 19th century,

同樣是非法的：在 19 世紀末，

right after the elevator was invented,

電梯被發明以後，

we built these charming urban buildings,

我們建造了這些迷人的城市建築，

these lovely buildings, all over the world,

這些可愛的建築，遍布世界各地，

from Italy to India.

從意大利到印度。

And they had maybe 10 or 12 apartments in them.

建築中可能建有 10 或 12 套公寓。

They had one small elevator and a staircase that wrapped them

它們會有個小電梯 和圍繞著電梯的樓梯，

and a light well.

還有個採光天井。

And not only were they charming buildings that were cost-effective,

它們不僅是 符合成本效益的迷人建築，

they were communal --

它們也是社區化的。

you ran into your neighbor on that stairwell.

你會在那樓梯間碰到你的鄰居。

Well, you can't build this, either.

你也不被允許這麼建造了。

By contrast, today, when we have to build a major new apartment building somewhere,

相比之下，如今，當我們要在某處 建造一座主要的新公寓大樓時，

we have to build lots and lots of elevators

我們必須建造很多、很多電梯，

and lots of fire stairs,

和很多消防梯，

and we have to connect them with these long, anonymous, dreary corridors.

而且我們必須將它們與這些漫長、 無名、沉悶的走廊連接起來。

Now, developers -- when they're confronted with the cost

現在，當開發商們 面對那所有公設的成本時，

of all of that common infrastructure,

they have to spread that cost over more apartments,

他們不得不將這筆費用 分攤到更多公寓，

so they want to build bigger buildings.

所以他們想建造更大型的大樓。

What that results in is the thud,

結果是沉悶的，

the dull thud of the same apartment building being built

那在世界各個城市 建造相同的公寓大樓的沉悶。

in every city across the world.

And this is not only creating physical sameness,

這不僅是創造了外表的同一性，

it's creating social sameness,

它也創造了社會的同一性，

because these buildings are more expensive to build,

因為這些建築的建造成本比較高，

and it helped to create an affordability crisis

而它也在世界各地的城市 助長了負擔能力危機，

in cities all over the world, including places like Vancouver.

包括了溫哥華。

Now, I said there was a third reason for all this sameness,

現在，我說過同一性有第三個原因，

and that's really a psychological one.

這真的是心理層面的原因。

It's a fear of difference,

是一種對差異的恐懼，

and architects hear this all the time from their clients:

而建築師會經常聽到 他們的客戶問說：

"If I try that new idea, will I be sued?

「如果我嘗試這新想法， 會被起訴嗎？」

Will I be mocked?

我會被嘲笑嗎？

Better safe than sorry."

寧求穩妥，以免後悔。」

And all of these things have conspired together

當這所有事情都凑合起来，

to blanket our planet with a homogeneity that I think is deeply problematic.

以讓我們的地球具有同質性時， 我認為這是非常有問題的。

So how can we do the opposite?

那麼我們如何反向而行呢？

How can we go back to building cities

我們怎樣才能回到過去，

that are physically and culturally varied again?

再次建造那些外表和文化上 都很多樣化的城市呢？

How can we build cities of difference?

我們該如何建造有差異化的城市呢？

I would argue that we should start

我認為，我們應該先以 在全球注入當地人開始。

by injecting into the global the local.

This is already happening with food, for instance.

例如，在飲食方面 已經可以看到這種情況的發生。

You just look at the way in which craft beer has taken on corporate beer.

您只需看看精釀啤酒 對商業啤酒的影響。

Or, how many of you still eat Wonder Bread?

或者，你們當中有多少人 還在吃神奇麵包？

I'd bet most of you don't.

我敢打賭你們大多數人都不吃了。

And I bet you don't because you don't want processed food

我認為那是因為 你不想再吃加工食品。

in your life.

So if you don't want processed food,

所以，如果你不再要加工食品，

why would you want processed cities?

那你為什麼還要「加工城市」呢？

Why would you want these mass-produced, bleached places

為什麼你會想要在 這些大量生產、被漂白的地方，

where all of us have to live and work every day?

每天生活和工作呢？

(Applause)

（掌聲）

So, technology was a big part of the problem in the 20th century.

因此，科技是 20 世紀面對的 問題的很大一部分。

When we invented the automobile, what happened is,

當我們發明汽車時，

全世界都開始去適應這項發明。

the world all bent towards the invention.

And we recreated our landscape around it.

我們圍繞著汽車的標準 重新創建了我們的景觀。

In the 21st century,

在 21 世紀，

technology can be part of the solution --

科技可以成為解決方案的一部分，

if it bends to the needs of the world.

如果它適應這世界的需求。

So what do I mean by that?

我想要表達什麼呢？

Take the autonomous vehicle.

以自動駕駛汽車為例。

I don't think the autonomous vehicle is exciting because it's a driverless car.

我並不覺得自動駕駛汽車令人振奮， 因為它只是一輛無人駕駛的汽車。

坦白說，這對我來說， 只意味著路上會更擁堵。

That, to me, only implies

that there's even more congestion on the roads, frankly.

I think what's exciting about the autonomous vehicle is the promise --

我覺得令人振奮的應該是 自動駕駛汽車的承諾——

and I want to stress the word "promise,"

我想要強調「承諾」這個詞，

given the recent accident in Arizona --

鑑於亞利桑那州最近的交通事故——

the promise that we could have these small, urban vehicles

是關於這些小型城市交通工具

that could safely comingle with pedestrians and bicycles.

能夠安全地與行人 和自行車相處的承諾。

That would enable us to design humane streets again,

這將讓我們能夠再次設計 人性化的街道，

streets without curbs,

沒有緣石的街道，

maybe streets like the wooden walkways on Fire Island.

也許可以設計像 紐約火島上的木製人行道。

Or maybe we could design streets with the cobblestone of the 21st century,

或許我們可以用 21 世紀的 鵝卵石來設計街道，

something that captures kinetic energy, melts snow,

一些可以紀錄動能、讓雪融化，

helps you with your fitness when you walk.

在你步行時可以幫助你鍛煉身體。

Or remember those big ladder fire trucks?

還記得剛才提及的雲梯消防車嗎？

What if we could replace them and all the asphalt that comes with them

假如我們能以無人機和機器人 來取代消防車和瀝青，

with drones and robots that could rescue people from burning buildings?

把人從火場裡救出來呢？

And if you think that's outlandish, you'd be amazed to know

如果你認為這是難以接受的，

你會對那項科技今時今日

how much of that technology is already being used today

在救援活動中的 使用程度感到十分驚訝。

in rescue activity.

But now I'd like you to really imagine with me.

但我現在希望你可以跟我一起想像。

Imagine if we could design the hovercraft wheelchair.

想像一下，如果我們 能夠設計氣墊輪椅。對吧？

Right?

一項不僅能促進平等權益的發明，

An invention that would not only allow equal access,

but would enable us to build the Italian hill town of the 21st century.

也讓我們能夠建造 屬於 21 世紀的意大利山城。

I think you'd be amazed to know

我想你會感到驚訝，

that just a few of these inventions, responsive to human need,

當你知道其中一些 滿足人類需求的發明，

would completely transform the way we could build our cities.

會徹底改變我們建造城市的方式。

Now, I bet you're also thinking:

我敢打賭你現在也正想著：

"We don't have kinetic cobblestones or flying wheelchairs yet,

「我們還沒能創造出 動能鵝卵石或飛行輪椅，

so what can we do about this problem with today's technology?"

那我們可以運用現今的 哪些科技來解決這問題呢？」

And my inspiration for that question comes from a very different city,

我對這個問題的靈感 來自一個非常不同的城市，

the city of Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.

蒙古的烏蘭巴托市。 （註：原名庫倫，是蒙古國首都）

I have clients there

在那裏，我有客戶要求我們設計

who have asked us to design a 21st-century open-air village

一個可以持續發熱的 21 世紀露天村莊，

that's sustainably heated using today's technology,

運用現今的技術，

in the heart of their downtown.

座落於他們的市中心。

And that's to cope with their frigid winters.

那是為了應付他們嚴酷的寒冬。

And the project is both poetry and prose.

所以，這項目既是詩歌又是散文。

The poetry is really about evoking the local:

詩歌在於喚醒當地人：

the mountainous terrain,

多山的地形，

using colors to pick up the spectacular light,

使用顏色來突出那耀眼的光線，

understanding how to interpret the nomadic traditions

了解如何詮釋讓蒙古 如此有活力的游牧傳統。

that animate the nation of Mongolia.

The prose has been the development of a catalogue of buildings,

散文則是一系列的建築發展，

of small buildings that are fairly affordable,

那些相當實惠的小型建築，

using local construction materials and technology

使用當地的建築材料和技術，

that can still provide new forms of housing,

但仍然可以建設新的住房形式、

new workspace,

新的工作空間、

new shops

新的店面，

and cultural buildings, like a theater or a museum --

和文化建築，如劇院或博物館，

even a haunted house.

甚至是鬼屋。

While working on this in our office,

在辦公室設計它時，

we've realized that we're building upon the work of our colleagues,

我們意識到自己正以 同事的作品為基礎，

including architect Tatiana Bilbao, working in Mexico City;

包括在墨西哥城工作的 建築師塔蒂亞娜·畢爾巴鄂；

Pritzker laureate Alejandro Aravena, working in Chile;

在智利工作的普立茲克建築獎得主 亞歷杭德羅·阿拉韋納，

and recent Pritzker winner Balkrishna Doshi, working in India.

還有最近榮獲普立茲克獎， 在印度工作的巴爾克里希納·多希。

And all of them are building spectacular new forms of affordable housing,

他們都在以與眾不同的新形式 建造經濟實惠的房子，

but they're also building cities of difference,

但他們也在建造有差異化的城市，

because they're building cities that respond to local communities,

因為他們建造的是符合當地社區、

local climates

當地氣候，

and local construction methods.

和當地建築技術的城市。

We're doubling down on that idea, we're researching a new model

我們正對這想法付出雙倍努力， 我們正在研究一種新模式，

for our growing cities with gentrification pressures,

來克服面對上流化壓力 且不斷增長的城市，

that could build upon that late-19th-century model

建立在具有 19 世紀後期 核心的建築模型上，

with that center core,

but a prototype that could shape-shift in response to local needs

但原形可以根據當地需求 和當地建築材料進行改變外形。

and local building materials.

All of these ideas, to me, are nostalgia-free.

對我來說，這所有想法 都與懷舊無關。

They all tell me

全都告訴我，

that we can build cities that can grow,

我們可以建造可成長的城市，

but grow in a way that reflects the diverse residents

但要以反映居住在這些城市中的 多元化居民的方式成長；

that live in those cities;

grow in a way that can accommodate all income groups,

以適應所有收入群體的方式成長，

all colors, creeds, genders.

所有膚色、教派、性別。

We could build such spectacular cities that we could disincentivize sprawl

我們可以建造十分壯觀的城市，

讓我們可以抑制城市 雜亂無序地擴展，並保護大自然。

and actually protect nature.

We can grow cities that are high-tech,

我們可以發展高科技的城市，

but also respond to the timeless cultural needs of the human spirit.

同時也符合了人類精神中 永垂不朽的文化需求。

I'm convinced that we can build cities of difference

我相信我們可以 建造有差異化的城市，

that help to create the global mosaic to which so many of us aspire.

來助於創造我們許多人 所渴望的全球馬賽克。

Thank you.

謝謝。

(Applause)

（掌聲）