城市規劃專業外文翻譯 ----德黑蘭的城市規劃與發展

1、<p>　　Urban planning and development in</p><p><b>　　Tehran</b></p><p>　　Ali Madanipour</p><p>　　Department of Architecture, Planning and Landscape, Newcastle Univer

2、sity, Newcastle, United Kingdom</p><p>　　Available online 25 September 2006</p><p>　　With a population of around 7 million in a metropolitan region of 12 million inhabitants, Tehran is one of th

3、e larger cities of the world. This paper charts its planning and development through the ages, particularly since the mid-20th century, a period in which the city has gained most of its phenomenal growth. Three phases ar

4、e identified in this historical process, with different types of urban planning exercised through infrastructure design and development, land use regulation, and policy de</p><p>　　_ 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All r

5、ights reserved. Keywords: Planning, Urban growth, Iranian cities</p><p>　　Planning through infrastructure design and development: foundations for growth</p><p>　　The first phase of Tehran’s plan

6、ning refers to the period before the Second World War, whereby at</p><p>　　least three major efforts set the framework for the city’s growth and development: walling the city</p><p>　　(1550s) ,

7、expanding the walled city (1870s) and building a new urban infrastructure (1930s). They were all led by the government’s ability and desire to instigate change and shape the city through undertaking large-scale infrastru

8、cture projects. </p><p>　　Tehran was a village outside the ancient city of Ray, which lay at the foot of mount Damavand, the highest peak in the country, and at the intersection of two major trade highways:

9、the east–west Silk Road along the southern edge of Alburz mountains and the north–south route that connected the Caspian Sea to the Persian Gulf. Ray had been inhabited for thousands of years and was the capital of the S

10、eljuk dynasty in the 11th century; however, it declined at the end of the medieval period, when Teh</p><p>　　The first large-scale town planning exercise in Tehran was undertaken in 1553, with the constructi

11、on of a bazaar and city walls, which were square and had gates on four sides, in accordance with the pattern of ancient Persian cities (Barthold, 1984). This set the framework for other developments that followed, and th

12、e city grew in significance, eventually to be selected in 1785 as the capital of the Qajar dynasty (1779–1925).</p><p>　　On becoming the capital, the city swelled by courtiers and soldiers, who were followed

13、 by trades and services. From a population of 15,000 at the end of the 18th century, Tehran grew tenfold by the 1860s, with a 10th of its inhabitants now living outside the old walls (Ettehadieh, 1983). The country’s mil

14、itary defeats in its encounters with Britain and Russia had engendered a process of reform, which was now being extended to the capital city. The second large-scale town planning exercise in Teh</p><p>　　The

15、 city continued to grow and pressure for modernization intensified, which was manifested in the Constitutional Revolution of 1906. A modern municipality was established in 1910, transforming the old system of urban gover

16、nance. After the First World War, the Pahlavi dynasty came to power and this lasted from 1925 to 1979. The new regime’s emphasis was on secularism and nationalism, which were reflected in administrative centralization, m

17、odernization of the army, expansion of bureaucracy, devel</p><p>　　These large-scale urban planning and development phases of Tehran were all efforts at modernization, instigating and managing radical change

18、. However, while the first phase had used distinctively ancient Persian imagery and local expertise, the second and third phases employed European images and experts, primarily from France and Germany. What these early t

19、own planning efforts shared was that they were all envisaging a particular new form and implementing it through the (re)development of the u</p><p>　　The reforms in the second half of the 19th century opened

20、 up the city’s society and space to new economic and cultural patterns, and unleashed centrifugal and dialectic forces that exploded in two major revolutions. Economically, the city started to be integrated into the worl

21、d market as a peripheral node. Embracing the market economy divided the city along the lines of income and wealth, while new cultural fault lines emerged along lifestyle and attitude towards tradition and modernity. Rich

22、 an</p><p>　　Planning through land-use regulation: harnessing speculative development</p><p>　　The second type of planning to emerge in Tehran was in the 1960s, which saw the preparation of plan

23、s</p><p>　　to regulate and manage future change. The city had grown in size and complexity to such an extent that</p><p>　　its spatial management needed additional tools, which resulted in the g

24、rowing complexity of municipal</p><p>　　organization, and in the preparation of a comprehensive plan for the city. </p><p>　　After the Second World War, during which the Allied forces occupied t

25、he country, there was a period of democratization, followed by political tensions of the start of the cold war, and struggles</p><p>　　over the control of oil. This period was ended in 1953 by a coup detat t

26、hat returned the Shah to</p><p>　　power, who then acted as an executive monarch for the next 25 years. With high birth rates and an intensification of rural–urban migration, Tehran— and other large cities—gr

27、ew even faster than before. By 1956, Tehran’s population rose to 1.5 million, by 1966 to 3 million, and by 1976 to 4.5 million; its size grew from 46 km² in 1934 to 250 km² in 1976 (Kariman, 1976; Vezarat-e Bar

28、nameh va Budgeh, 1987).</p><p>　　Revenues from the oil industry rose, creating surplus resources that needed to be circulated and absorbed in the economy. An industrialization drive from the mid-1950s create

29、d many new jobs in big cities, particularly in Tehran. The land reforms of the 1960s released large numbers of rural population</p><p>　　from agriculture, which was not able to absorb the exponential demogra

30、phic growth. This new labour</p><p>　　force was attracted to cities: to the new industries, to the construction sector which seemed to be always booming, to services and the constantly growing public sector

31、bureaucracy. Tehran’s role as the</p><p>　　administrative, economic, and cultural centre of the country, and its gateway to the outside world, was firmly consolidated.</p><p>　　Urban expansion i

32、n postwar Tehran was based on under-regulated, private-sector driven, speculative development. Demand for housing always exceeded supply, and a surplus of labor and capital was always available; hence the flourishing con

33、struction industry and the rising prices of land and property in Tehran. The city grew in a disjointed manner in all directions along the outgoing roads, integrating the surrounding towns and villages, and growing new su

34、burban settlements. This intensified social</p><p>　　The 1966 Municipality Act provided, for the first time, a legal framework for the formation of the Urban Planning High Council and for the establishment o

35、f land-use planning in the form of comprehensive plans. A series of other laws followed, underpinning new legal and institutional arrangements for the Tehran municipality, allowing the Ministry of Housing and others to w

36、ork together in managing the growth of the city. The most important step taken in planning was the approval of the Tehran Comp</p><p>　　The proposals were, nevertheless, mostly advocating physical change, at

37、tempting, in a modernist</p><p>　　spirit, to impose a new order onto this complex metropolis. The future of the city was envisaged to</p><p>　　be growing westward in a linear polycentric form, r

38、educing the density and congestion of the city centre. The city would be formed of 10 large urban districts, separated from each other by green belts,</p><p>　　each with about 500,000 inhabitants, a commerci

39、al and an industrial centre with high-rise buildings.</p><p>　　Each district (mantagheh) would be subdivided into a number of areas (nahyeh) and neighborhoods</p><p>　　(mahalleh). An area, with

40、a population of about 15–30,000, would have a high school and a commercial centre and other necessary facilities. A neighborhood, with its 5000 inhabitants, would have a primary school and a local commercial centre. Thes

41、e districts and areas would be linked by a transportation network, which included motorways, a rapid transit route and a bus route. The stops on the rapid transit route would be developed as the nodes for concentration o

42、f activities with a high residenti</p><p>　　Almost all these measures can be traced to the fashionable planning ideas of the time, which were largely influenced by the British New Towns. In his book, The Hea

43、rt of Our Cities, Victor Gruen</p><p>　　(1965) had envisaged the metropolis of tomorrow as a central city surrounded by 10 additional cities,</p><p>　　each with its own centre. This resembled Eb

44、enezer Howard’s (1960, p. 142) ‘‘social cities’’, in which a</p><p>　　central city was surrounded by a cluster of garden cities. In Tehran’s plan, a linear version of this concept was used. Another linear co

45、ncept, which was used in the British New Towns of the time such as Redditch and Runcorn, was the importance of public transport routes as the town’s spine, with its stopping points serving as its foci. The use of neighbo

46、rhood units of limited population, focused on a neighborhood centre and a primary school, was widely used in these New Towns, an idea that had </p><p>　　Other major planning exercises, undertaken in the 1970

47、s, included the partial development of a New Town, Shahrak Gharb, and the planning of a new administrative centre for the city—Shahestan—by the British consultants Llewelyn–Davies, although there was never time to implem

48、ent the latter, as the tides of revolution were rising. </p><p>　　Planning through policy development: reconstruction after the revolution and war</p><p>　　The revolutionary and post-revolutiona

49、ry period can be divided into three phases: revolution (1979–1988), reconstruction (1989–1996), and reform (1997–2004), each demonstrating different approaches to urban planning in Tehran. </p><p>　　After t

50、wo years of mass demonstrations in Tehran and other cities, the year 1979 was marked by the advent of a revolution that toppled the monarchy in Iran, to be replaced by a state which uneasily combined the rule of the cler

51、gy with parliamentary republicanism. Its causes can be traced in the shortcomings of the Shah’s model of development, which led to clashes between modernization and traditions, between economic development and political

52、underdevelopment, between global market forces and lo</p><p>　　The revolution was followed by a long war (1980–1988) with Iraq, which halted economic development. Investment in urban development dwindled, wh

53、ile rural areas and provincial towns were favoured by the revolutionary government, both to curb rural–urban migration and to strike a balance with large cities. The key planning intervention in this period was to impose

54、 daytime restrictions on the movement of private cars in the city centre. Meanwhile, the war and the promise of free or low-cost facilit</p><p>　　After the revolution and war, a period of normalization and r

55、econstruction started, which lasted for most of the 1990s. This period witnessed a number of efforts at urban planning in Tehran. Once again, urban development had intensified without an effective framework to manage it.

56、 The comprehensive plan came under attack after the revolution, as it was considered unable to cope with change. In 1998, the Mayor criticized it for being mainly a physical development plan, for being rooted in the pol&

57、lt;/p><p>　　The comprehensive plan’s 25-year lifespan came to an end in 1991. A firm of Iranian consultants (A-Tech) was commissioned in 1985 to prepare a plan for the period of 1986–1996. After much delay, it

58、was only in 1993 that the plan was finally approved by the Urban Planning High Council. This plan also focused on growth management and a linear spatial strategy, using the scales of urban region, subregion, district, ar

59、ea and neighbourhood. It promoted conservation, decentralization, polycentric deve</p><p>　　The 1993 plan was not welcomed by the municipality, which disagreed with its assessments and priorities, finding it

60、 unrealistic, expensive, and impossible to implement. The municipality produced its own strategic plan for the period 1996–2001, known as Tehran Municipalty’s First Plan, or Tehran 80. Rather than introducing a land-use

61、plan as its goal, this was the first plan for the city that emphasized a set of strategies and propose d policies to achieve them. It identified the city’s main pro</p><p>　　The municipality implemented par

62、t of the proposals, such as increasing the amount of green open spaces in the south, or constructing new parts of the motorway network, which was proposed by the 1968 plan; opening large parts of the city to new developm

63、ent, and easing movement across the city. Following the advice of the 1993 plan, the municipality relaxed FAR limits and allowed higher densities through bonus zoning. This, however, was not based on planning considerati

64、ons, but was mainly to bring</p><p>　　This controversial period of reconstruction was followed by a period of democratic reform, which re-launched an elected city council for the city, which at first caused

65、institutional confusion about its relationship with the mayor and the municipality. The council published its own vision of the city as Tehran Charter in 2001, which was the summary of the principles agreed between counc

66、il members, non-governmental organizations, and urban experts at a congress about the subject. The Charter adop</p><p>　　Currently, detailed plans are being prepared for the city’s 22 districts, and work is

67、under way on a strategic plan to link these detailed plans and to guide the future development of the city as a whole. Even though the city is more integrated and democratic than before and has a more coherent approach t

68、o planning (Hourcade, 2000), some authorities still see plans as isolated documents, rather than seeing planning as a continuous process. Land use plans are produced by private sector consultant</p><p>　　spe

69、cified period. The role of the municipality is merely implementation of these plans, rather than</p><p>　　generating and revising them. New schemes for urban motorways and large-scale radical redevelopment o

70、f the central and decayed areas continue to be prepared and implemented. The last mayor, who was elected the president of the republic in 2005, was a civil engineer, putting road building schemes high on his agenda, even

71、 aiming to widen parts of the most beautiful boulevard in the city (Vali Asr) to ease traffic flows. Meanwhile, the city continues to suffer from acute social polarization, high l</p><p>　　Managing change in

72、 a metropolis</p><p>　　Leaving aside the earlier phases, the key urban planning stages in the 20th century (1930s, 1960s, 1990s) show some broad similarities: they mark the periods of relative economic and p

73、olitical strength, in which at once urban development flourishes and the government feels able enough to manage growth. Iran’s oil economy is so much integrated with the global economy that these periods parallel the int

74、ernational economic cycles and periods of urban development booms. These planning stages also sh</p><p>　　The other feature they all share is their preference for redevelopment, which is the hallmark of a co

75、untry with a young population caught in the fever of modernization, despite its upheavals and setbacks. Post-revolutionary governments claimed to revive many traditional forms and practices, as a reaction to radical mode

76、rnization of the past. In relation to the built environment, however, they have shown strong modernist tendencies, with redevelopment remaining their favourite device, similar to </p><p>　　Tehran’ governance

77、 has been dominated by the central government. Although the municipality has grown in size and complexity, it is still under the shadow of government ministries, even after the launch of an elected city council and a deg

78、ree of financial autonomy. It is only charged with implementing the plans, rather than preparing them; and yet it is expected to have financial autonomy, resulting in controversial ways of implementing or changing planni

79、ng regulations. It is only charge d to man</p><p>　　Conclusion </p><p>　　Tehran’s planning history shows early stages in which new infrastructure was designed and developed by the government as

80、part of its strategy for modernization and growth management. The intensity of speculative development after the Second World War met the demands of the exponential growth of the city’s population. This, however, needed

81、to be controlled and regulated through a planning process, which produced Tehran’s comprehensive plan of 1968. Within a decade, the revolution interrupted its </p><p>　　德黑蘭的城市規劃與發展</p><p>　　Ali

82、Madanipour</p><p>　　英國紐卡斯爾大學建筑系規劃和景觀方向</p><p>　　2006年9月25日</p><p>　　摘要：德黑蘭是世界上較大的城市之一，擁有居民人口1200萬，都市人口約700萬，本文主要介紹其規劃和歷代的發展，特別是自20世紀中期，在這個時期城市獲得了其最顯著的增長。這一歷史進程的三個明確的階段分別是：不同的城市規劃設計和

83、基礎設施開發、土地利用規范發展、政策發展。</p><p>　　Elsevier Ltd版權所有，2006年。</p><p>　　關鍵字：（城市）規劃，城市發展，伊朗城市</p><p>　　基礎設施的設計的發展規劃：基礎增長</p><p>　　德黑蘭規劃的第一階段是指第二次世界大戰之前，至少有三個主要的成就為城市的成長和發展框架服務：城

84、墻的城市（1550），擴大的寨城（1870），建設一個新的城市基礎設施（1930）。他們都是以政府主導的能力和意愿來改變和塑造大規模的城市基建工程。</p><p>　　德黑蘭是在一座在古老的城市Ray外的村莊，在該國的最高峰達馬萬德山的山腳，也在兩個主要貿易公路交匯處：東西線連接絲綢之路和厄爾布爾士山脈和南北線連接里海和波斯灣南部邊緣。這里數千年之前就有人居住，是11世紀時塞爾柱王朝的首都，但它在中世紀時期結束

85、時衰弱了，那時德黑蘭開始發展（Lockhart，1960）。</p><p>　　德黑蘭第一次大規模的城市規劃工作是1553年的一個市場和城墻，依照古代波斯的城市格局設計它的1個廣場和4側的大門建筑（Barthold，1984）。此設計成為隨后其他發展的框架，并且對城市的成長有重大意義，最終在1785年被選定作為卡扎爾王朝（1779-1925）的首都。</p><p>　　在成為首都(空格

86、)之后，因為從事貿易和服務的市民和士兵城市開始膨脹。德黑蘭9世紀60年代人口由18世紀末的15000增長了10倍，現在（Ettehadieh，1983）古城墻外的居住居民有100萬。該國的與英國和俄羅斯戰爭的失敗推進了改革的進程，正在擴大到首都。因此德黑蘭第二次大規模的城市規劃工作做了容納增長和引進現代化建設的改革。它開始于1868年，有12年之久，新的城墻建造了一個完美的12大門八角形形式的建筑，它們的管理和因此增長的稅收比他們的防御

87、作用價值更大。首都這些變化包括一個新的中央廣場，新的街道，銀行，技術學院，醫院，電報房，酒店和歐洲風格的商店，這是根據一個英國觀察員的德黑蘭“雙重復興”方案所建造的（Curzon，1892，第300頁）。</p><p>　　1906年的憲政革命體現出城市的持續增長和現代化壓力的加劇?，F代直轄市成立于1910年，這改變了城市管理的舊體制。第一次世界大戰結束后，巴列維王朝上臺，這個王朝從1925年持續到1979年。

88、新政權的重點放在世俗主義和民族主義，體現出來就是集中的管理，現代化的軍隊，擴大的官僚，運輸網絡的發展，全國性市場的區域一體化和重組城鎮（Abrahamian，1982）。20世紀30年代普遍的道路拓寬計劃，徹底摧毀了歷史性的城市結構，使他們接觸到汽車。因此，德黑蘭經歷了第三次主要的城市規劃。 19世紀70年代的城墻成為不斷增長的城市的限制。到1932年，人口密度以每公頃105人的速度增加了一倍，并有三分之一的人口住在城墻外。除了人口壓力

89、和機動車輛，以政府的意愿來控制城市人口和城市基礎設施的現代化導致了大量的資金改造，等待著其被“根本上重新規劃和重新建造”的到來。(Lockhart, 1939, 第11頁). 新的林蔭大道建立在被毀壞的城墻和護城河旁，是一個218公里的新道路交通網絡的一部分?；始页菈σ呀洑埲辈蝗?，并被新的政府廣場所取代;零售商被鼓勵放棄舊的搬進新的街道。新的建筑和公建在全市興起。舊街</p><p>　　這些大規模的城市規劃和發

90、展的為德黑蘭現代化做出了貢獻，推進和進行著徹底的改變。在第一階段運用了古老的波斯鮮明的形象和本地的專業知識，第二和第三階段聘請主要來自法國和德國的專家運用歐洲派系的做法。這些早期的城市規劃成就共同的特點是，他們都設想一個特別的新形式，通過城市環境的發展來實施（翻新）;他們都是在一個相對較短的時間內規劃一系列形態上的改變。</p><p>　　19世紀下半葉的改革打開了城市的社會空間、新的經濟和文化模式，并釋放了離

91、心力和辯證力，爆發了兩次主要的革命。在經濟上，城市開始被納入世界市場作為周邊的節點。市場經濟沿著收入和財富線分隔城市，而新的文化斷層線出現了對生活方式和對傳統與現代的態度的分歧。以前并排住在老城區的富人和窮人，現在彼此分開在兩極分化的城市里。此外，在新街區新街道廣場，現代化設施很受歡迎，同時傳統主義者繼續生活和工作在這個城市的舊區。從那以后，這些經濟和文化極化以及其相關的局勢開始緊張，這是有伊朗特色的城市狀況。</p>&

92、lt;p>　　土地利用規范規劃：利用機會發展</p><p>　　出現在德黑蘭的第二類規劃是在20世紀60年代，這個規劃意識到了計劃調控前的準備并考慮到未來的變化。全市已長成了一定的規模性和復雜性，以這樣的程度，空間管理需要另外的手段來處理城市組織和不斷發展的復雜性，并為城市總體規劃做準備。</p><p>　　第二次世界大戰后，在盟軍占領國家的期間，有一個時期的民主化，在冷戰時開始

93、的政治緊張局勢之后，它們互相斗爭對石油的控制權。這個時期已經結束于1953年，結果是由政變產生了伊朗王，那個后來擔任了25年的行政君主的人。隨著高出生率和農村向城市遷移，德黑蘭和其他大城市增長加劇甚至比以前更快地。到1956年，德黑蘭的人口上升到150萬，到了1966至300萬， 1976至450萬，其規模也從1934年46平方公里到1976年的250平方公里。</p><p>　　從石油行業的收入增長創造的盈余

94、資源，需要流通和經濟的吸收。50年代中期，特別是在工業化的驅動下德黑蘭許多大城市有了新工作。20世紀60年代的土地改革釋放了大量來自農業的農村人口，這是不能吸收的指數人口增長。這種新的勞動力被吸引到城市：到新的產業，到似乎始終蓬勃發展建筑界，去服務不斷增長公共部門和官僚機構。德黑蘭的角色是國家的行政，經濟，文化中心，它堅定而鞏固地通往外面的世界。</p><p>　　德黑蘭戰后的城市擴張，是在管制、私營部門的推動

95、，投機性的發展下進行的。房屋一直供不應求，并有大量可用的富余勞動力和資本，因此在德黑蘭建筑行業蓬勃發展，土地和財產的價格不斷上漲。這個城市成長為一個在某種意義上道路對外脫節的，城鎮和鄉村一體化的，郊區不斷增長的新的定居點。這加強了社會的孤立性，破壞了郊區的花園和綠地，并使城市管理者的感到無能為力。1962年一位副市長在德黑蘭表示：“建筑物和居民點已經滿足人們所想要的無論何處何種樣子”，創造了一個“事實上城鎮相互連接的方式不當”的城市（N

96、afisi, 1964,第426頁）。有許多事情迫切需要做，但市政府并沒有法律上或經濟上有能力處理這進程。</p><p>　　1966年市政法第一次規定了城規最高委員會的法律體制和土地利用規劃公司的綜合計劃。還有他一系列法律，以支持德黑蘭市的新的法律和體制安排，使住房和其他管理工作在城市中發展起來。最重要的一步是策劃的德黑蘭綜合計劃于1968年被批準。它是由一個伊朗規劃師Fereydun Ghaffari領導下

97、的美國的Victor Gruen和伊朗的Aziz Farmanfarmaian所共同產生的（Ardalan，1986）。該計劃確定的城市的問題是：城市密度過高特別是城市中心、主要道路沿線商業活動的膨脹、污染、不完善的基礎設施，貧困地區廣泛的失業和低收入群體不斷地遷移到德黑蘭。解決的辦法是城市自然社會和經濟結構的轉型。(Farmanfarmaian and Gruen, 1968). 不過該提案大多主張形態上的變化，試圖強調一個現代化的理