著：（韓）曺美和 （阿根廷/西班牙）梅麗莎·佩索阿 （西班牙）喬迪·弗蘭克薩 （西班牙）華金·薩巴特 譯：熊祥瑞 校對：王勤

在人類史以及地圖學(xué)自公元前2500年至今的發(fā)展軌跡之中貫穿著表現(xiàn)城市和地域的努力[1]①。地圖傳統(tǒng)上被視為對現(xiàn)實的表現(xiàn)或者本身就是現(xiàn)實。但是制圖學(xué)所提供的并非客觀中立的圖像，這是在現(xiàn)實和現(xiàn)實表現(xiàn)之間存在著的一個基本問題。一方面，每張地圖都是在某個文化背景下，以特定技術(shù)和目的編制而成的。另一方面，被表現(xiàn)的對象與表現(xiàn)出來的內(nèi)容之間從來都不能確保絕對寫實。恰恰由于每個主體眼中的現(xiàn)實都不盡相同，我們無法按照所見來表現(xiàn)現(xiàn)實。地圖則由此為我們提供了一種以肉眼無法獲得的世界觀，以及一張允許我們通過簡單一瞥就能攝取不可見對象的圖像。既然地圖不能代表現(xiàn)實，而只是可能生成的眾多圖像之一，我們就需要保持謹(jǐn)慎且具批判性的態(tài)度來審視它們[2]。然而，任何地圖都不絕對真實這一事實并不意味著它們毫無用處，恰恰相反，在城市規(guī)劃和地域規(guī)劃中，繪圖是我們用以從文化、政治或經(jīng)濟(jì)方面解讀世界的基本要素，它能幫助我們理解、想象和識別一個空間。就此而言，以批判性的眼光審視對地域和城市的圖形表現(xiàn)，為我們提供了理解其規(guī)劃方式影響因素的途徑。

這一對釜山、特內(nèi)里費島和巴格斯地區(qū)3個案例制圖表現(xiàn)方式的比較性研究聚焦在不同背景和時代中介于表現(xiàn)和設(shè)計之間的領(lǐng)域，揭示圖形表現(xiàn)概念和規(guī)劃設(shè)計策略之間的聯(lián)系。借此驗證在繪圖時，我們不應(yīng)僅僅局限在表達(dá)該地有什么，而應(yīng)同時表達(dá)被建構(gòu)和要傳遞的概念或闡釋。正如曼努埃爾·德·索拉所說：“繪圖就是選擇，選擇就是闡釋，闡釋就是提案?！盵3]而貫穿于這3個過程的創(chuàng)造性也是本研究將著重討論的內(nèi)容。

1 釜山：從地產(chǎn)結(jié)構(gòu)到城市設(shè)計

1.1 韓國新制圖學(xué)的到來

從西方國家對亞洲的遠(yuǎn)征，到日本帝國的擴(kuò)張及其對近鄰朝鮮半島的殖民，現(xiàn)代制圖學(xué)在19—20世紀(jì)之間的整個全球化過程中，扮演著重要而具有決定性的角色。在這一時期通過引入西方技術(shù)而發(fā)展起來的日本制圖學(xué)，囊括了幾個世紀(jì)間的歐洲科學(xué)成果，如文藝復(fù)興時期笛卡爾坐標(biāo)系的創(chuàng)立、卡西尼三角測量、等高線的發(fā)明，以及法國大革命后在巴黎啟用的作為現(xiàn)代城市基礎(chǔ)的區(qū)域劃分和地籍簿（圖1）。19世紀(jì)，渴望在法國復(fù)興羅馬帝國的拿破侖通過戰(zhàn)爭傳播了現(xiàn)代制圖學(xué)，但他不會想到，他的策略會在地球另一端又被日本帝國在對朝鮮半島的殖民統(tǒng)治中重新采用。

1 1859年（約翰·沃德）、1875年（日本海軍）、1894年（日本軍隊）和1905年（上野）的釜山港口圖The Port of Busan in 1859 (John Ward), 1875 (Japanese Navy), 1894 (Japanese Army) and 1905 (Ueno)

占領(lǐng)朝鮮半島后，日本繪制地圖的目的從軍事行動轉(zhuǎn)向殖民統(tǒng)治。殖民政府立即對朝鮮半島進(jìn)行了全域測繪，以此作為其殖民統(tǒng)治的第一個策略。通過聯(lián)結(jié)日本的對馬島與朝鮮半島的絕影島和巨濟(jì)島的三角網(wǎng)絡(luò)為確立地理附屬關(guān)系奠定科學(xué)基礎(chǔ)[4]（圖2）。這一地籍圖為建立專屬土地所有權(quán)，并將朝鮮半島經(jīng)濟(jì)納入日本新興資本主義結(jié)構(gòu)的稅收體系建立了法律基礎(chǔ)。從歷史上看，入侵者一旦對新領(lǐng)土形成有效統(tǒng)治，都會重修人口統(tǒng)計表，要么是因為人口減少，要么是為了抹去一切歷史的痕跡[7]。日本侵占者不想保留任何前朝的傳統(tǒng)，包括其語言、文化、歷史甚至地理。以下簡要介紹傳統(tǒng)制圖學(xué)及其空間概念，以理解取代它的新工具是如何改變對空間的闡釋的。

2 兩國間三角網(wǎng)絡(luò)式的聯(lián)結(jié)構(gòu)成了一種地理附屬關(guān)系[5-6]The connection of the two countries in the triangulation network became a geographical annexation[5-6]

1.2 朝鮮王朝制圖學(xué)中的傳統(tǒng)空間

19世紀(jì)朝鮮王朝開放港口接受國際影響，但這并非其第一次接觸西方知識。早在17世紀(jì)，由在中國傳教的利瑪竇所帶來的世界地圖也傳到了朝鮮半島。當(dāng)時利瑪竇認(rèn)為世界地圖是傳播天主教信仰最有用的方式[8]。這張地圖影響很大，并擴(kuò)展了當(dāng)?shù)氐牡乩韺W(xué)知識，但這并不意味著當(dāng)?shù)氐膫鹘y(tǒng)世界觀就會被西方世界觀取代。相反，擴(kuò)展原有世界觀來包含新的地理知識，觸發(fā)了傳統(tǒng)與西方表現(xiàn)方式之間的緊張關(guān)系[9]。

基于將領(lǐng)土理解為一個生命有機(jī)體的傳統(tǒng)地理觀念，朝鮮半島的國家地圖被描繪為長白山山脈和水系的連續(xù)體，完全不同于中國和日本的古代地圖[10]。自18世紀(jì)以來，比例和網(wǎng)格技術(shù)被普遍用于繪制國家地圖，到1861年的大東輿地圖已達(dá)到頂峰（圖3）。這些區(qū)域和地方地圖的空間概念、呈現(xiàn)方式由于目的和繪制者不同而有所差異[11]（圖4），但總體都遵循風(fēng)水原則，將人類活動置于風(fēng)、水之間。

3 1861年的大東輿地圖與當(dāng)前釜山地圖的對比Daedong Yeojido of 1861 and comparison with current map of Busan

4 釜山地區(qū)1760年的軍事網(wǎng)格地圖、18世紀(jì)應(yīng)用風(fēng)水原則的地圖、19世紀(jì)真景山水繪畫風(fēng)格的地圖Grid map of 1760, elaborated for military purposes; regional map of 18th century drawn with the Feng-shui criterion and local map of 19th century in Jingyeong landscape painting style

這雖然是基于隱喻性解釋的人文表達(dá)，但其對氣候、保護(hù)和獲取資源的關(guān)注接近現(xiàn)代地理學(xué)，例如山在北抵擋冬天的冷氣流，水在南冷卻夏天的熱氣流等。然而，現(xiàn)代制圖學(xué)不體現(xiàn)這些豐富的空間表現(xiàn)和理解，而僅遵循一個科學(xué)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。

1.3 通過新制圖學(xué)疊加新空間

位于朝鮮半島東南端的釜山在日本入侵中首當(dāng)其沖。日本海軍以海事測量為借口出現(xiàn)在其海岸，并引發(fā)軍事沖突，導(dǎo)致1876年釜山港口被迫開放，朝鮮王朝在1678年建立的專門管理與馬島商貿(mào)關(guān)系的行政設(shè)施草梁倭館也被移交給日本。日本對釜山的侵占自此已經(jīng)開始，早于1905年其在日俄戰(zhàn)爭勝利后在此建立理事廳，又于1910年將之變成朝鮮總督府。

日本通過宣示海域主權(quán)，征要越來越多的租界和非法購地來擴(kuò)張其領(lǐng)土（圖5）。最終在1906年基于規(guī)則網(wǎng)格繪制了一張新城市圖，并以領(lǐng)事之名發(fā)布建筑法規(guī)（圖6）。換言之，早在朝鮮總督府推行首爾新城市化計劃前幾十年，日本就以奧斯曼的巴黎重建計劃為范本在釜山展開了現(xiàn)代化城市的試驗[12]。之后又通過在1914年編制的地籍簿將這一試驗制度化，以固化其殖民統(tǒng)治。

5 1875年（上野）、1903年和1905年（吉田青木）的釜山港地圖，從租界區(qū)的變化反映日本統(tǒng)治的擴(kuò)張Busan port maps from 1875 (Ueno), 1903 and 1905 (Aoki, Yoshida) show the extent of Japanese rule from the concession area

6 1907年《韓國釜山港市街道明細(xì)圖》將新區(qū)規(guī)劃視為既定事實Detailed Picture of Busan Harbour Streets of 1907 depicts “planned new area” as if it is a definite one

1.4 新地籍圖和現(xiàn)代空間的產(chǎn)生

19世紀(jì)朝鮮王朝的登記文件僅以抽象的方式呈現(xiàn)地塊，而非經(jīng)過精確測量的。新地籍圖則明確了每個地塊的位置和界限。此圖通過畫線代表地籍記錄中有形或無形的元素，并由此指定了地塊邊界（圖7）。而這些線條一經(jīng)法律確認(rèn)，就開始形成對真實空間的控制?；谌毡局趁癯跗诘耐恋卣{(diào)查和地籍簿的建立，當(dāng)?shù)囟愂栈A(chǔ)從農(nóng)業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)榉康禺a(chǎn)?？臻g概念的變化在社會經(jīng)濟(jì)和文化層面也都產(chǎn)生了更為深遠(yuǎn)的影響。

7 1912年測繪的東萊郡南川里地籍圖The cadastral drawing of Namcheon-li in Dongnae-gun,measured in 1912

抽象表現(xiàn)地塊并不意味著朝鮮半島上的傳統(tǒng)邊界概念是混沌空洞的，而只是有別于現(xiàn)代概念而已。朝鮮王朝時代，當(dāng)?shù)厝苏J(rèn)為土地的價值在于耕作，因此一個地塊的權(quán)屬和邊界取決于管理該土地的人和他的耕作能力[13]。于是耕作權(quán)也就自然高于財產(chǎn)權(quán)。尤其是在以種植稻谷為主的農(nóng)耕社會，土地灌溉和勞動分配都無法單獨完成，通常由鄰里一起管理共用土地、共同納稅。但是新登記系統(tǒng)忽略并打亂了所有這些社會經(jīng)濟(jì)體、集體空間組織、土地和勞動力價值體系，以及強(qiáng)烈的人地關(guān)系。由此導(dǎo)致了地域身份的喪失。

1.5 地籍圖作為城市規(guī)劃的工具

在釜山港地區(qū)植入現(xiàn)代空間后，其傳統(tǒng)中心東萊郡失去了原有的功能和象征作用。這一新的空間秩序在1914年通過行政區(qū)劃確立釜山府為城市區(qū)，東萊郡為非城市區(qū)。雖然隸屬于同一行政管轄，但城市區(qū)與一般區(qū)地籍圖的繪制分別采用2種不同比例（即1∶600和1∶1 200），比如瀛仙洞（Yeongseondong）的地籍圖（圖8）。換言之，從記錄詳細(xì)信息所耗費的時間和成本上就能看出要著力發(fā)展城市區(qū)的意圖。

8 瀛仙洞地籍簿封面總覽表和以2種不同比例繪制的詳圖The cover of cadastral drawings of Yeongseon-dong and the composition of drawings according to two synoptic tables with two different scales indicated on the cover

不同于一般區(qū)，城市區(qū)以1∶600的比例繪制了網(wǎng)格化道路布局（圖9）。網(wǎng)格覆蓋了從平地至20 m高的坡地，自此坡地陡升，已不再適用網(wǎng)格規(guī)劃。之前傳統(tǒng)村莊為了將平地充分用于農(nóng)耕而選址建在20 m之上的坡地。強(qiáng)制性的新城市規(guī)劃令他們失去了農(nóng)田，成為新城之外的邊緣地帶。

9 瀛仙洞地籍簿第12頁及其重構(gòu)12th page of cadastral drawings of Yeongseon-dong and its reconstruction

地籍圖顯示，隨著租界地的建立和日本移民人數(shù)的增加，緊鄰港口的市中心已經(jīng)被劃分為多個狹窄的地塊。而港口對面的瀛仙洞市區(qū)只是簡單地在既有農(nóng)業(yè)地塊上疊加了幾何網(wǎng)格（圖10）。與1924年的地形圖（圖11-1）相比可以看出1914年地籍圖上的網(wǎng)格其實是尚未實施的規(guī)劃，用以引導(dǎo)未來幾十年的建設(shè)。

10 釜山府地籍圖修補(bǔ)本和重繪本The cadastral map of Busan-bu patched and redrawn

11 釜山地區(qū)1924年的地形圖（11-1）和1928年的規(guī)劃圖（11-2）The 1924 topographic map (11-1) and the 1928 plan (11-2)

“地籍簿不僅是在設(shè)定新的所有者和控制權(quán)，而且是在重塑空間?！盵7]而這一登記工具不僅改變了稅收控制，也改變了空間秩序。建立一個專屬財產(chǎn)登記制度是土地資本化的關(guān)鍵。而現(xiàn)代制圖學(xué)的精確測量使生成可交易的地產(chǎn)空間成為可能。這些也是管控城市和建筑，即城市規(guī)劃的基礎(chǔ)。

本案例以地籍簿為工具，并基于規(guī)則的道路系統(tǒng)設(shè)計新城市，但并未表現(xiàn)沿街的土地細(xì)分或建造設(shè)想。盡管日本出于軍事目的快速吸收西方的知識，但當(dāng)時他們還幾乎無法開展城市測繪。不同于已繪有1∶200比例建筑平面的19世紀(jì)巴黎地籍圖，20世紀(jì)釜山地圖僅顯示了居住用地，而沒有建筑輪廓。這顯然還欠缺對建筑類型和地塊形式，或建筑立面、地塊和沿街面之間相互關(guān)聯(lián)的理解。然而恰恰是由于規(guī)劃不完整而留下的先前的痕跡，使這份地籍圖成為如今可用以還原傳統(tǒng)空間的最佳史料。

另外，該規(guī)劃在2種不同的結(jié)構(gòu)中制造了空間歧視，日本人在城中區(qū)而原住民被趕到郊區(qū)。如此不僅是將邊緣化人群排斥于現(xiàn)代化之外，而且是通過只畫新規(guī)劃、忽略原結(jié)構(gòu)的方法徹底抹去他們的存在。1928年的規(guī)劃圖（圖11-2）就是故意刪去原有村莊而僅以等高線取而代之，通過強(qiáng)行植入新的城市結(jié)構(gòu)，將傳統(tǒng)村莊驅(qū)逐到邊緣地帶，直至將他們從官方文件中抹去，從而判定其為非法和異常。而這些被忽視的傳統(tǒng)空間只有被繪制出來才可能被還原?！氨粔浩任幕环降膫鹘y(tǒng)教會我們，我們現(xiàn)在生活的‘例外狀態(tài)’實際上就是規(guī)則?！盵14]

2 特內(nèi)里費島總體規(guī)劃：分層法闡釋地域

3/4個世紀(jì)后，規(guī)劃危機(jī)從確定性轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)閺?fù)雜性。一些最有趣的地域規(guī)劃試圖通過對地域的特別闡釋和場景定義來應(yīng)對這種復(fù)雜性。這就需要通過不同的分層來闡釋地域，還要考慮到這些層間的關(guān)聯(lián)。事實上，對研究對象的有形反映構(gòu)成了不同決策和干預(yù)的起點。

20世紀(jì)80年代末，特內(nèi)里費島總體規(guī)劃將“多層”結(jié)構(gòu)引入地域闡釋和規(guī)劃②（圖12）：第一層基于詳細(xì)的地域形態(tài)學(xué)認(rèn)知（圖13），定義構(gòu)成其結(jié)構(gòu)、環(huán)境基質(zhì)和開放空間系統(tǒng)的元素；第二層聚焦于基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施網(wǎng)（道路鐵路、電信、供水、垃圾處理等）的流動性設(shè)計；第三層針對主要的聚落和經(jīng)濟(jì)活動（居住、工業(yè)、第三產(chǎn)業(yè)、物流、采礦或農(nóng)業(yè)等）的結(jié)構(gòu)。

12 1988年特內(nèi)里費島總體規(guī)劃中的多層方法A multilayer approach at the Tenerife Master Plan (1988)

特內(nèi)里費島（面積3 000 km2）是加那利群島的七島之一，位于大西洋中，受墨西哥灣暖流和信風(fēng)③影響，全年溫暖如春。海拔3 700多米的泰德火山限定了可容納75萬居民和500萬/年游客的區(qū)域。

特內(nèi)里費島總體規(guī)劃始于對地域形態(tài)的詳細(xì)描述和對戰(zhàn)后變遷的深入分析?！霸O(shè)計結(jié)合自然”[15]的理念在第一層的結(jié)構(gòu)中清晰可見。這一層的分析工作如此精細(xì)的目的在于能夠用以衡量支持某些活動的能力，以及評估某種物理干預(yù)（例如新高速公路）。對于總體規(guī)劃來說，這一層不僅是用來分析或衡量地域“使命”的工具，而且也被用于設(shè)計和管控地域的轉(zhuǎn)型[16-17]。

就此而言，通過第一層的闡釋確定同質(zhì)的管控區(qū)域（圖14），這種機(jī)制已經(jīng)成為該總體規(guī)劃提案的關(guān)鍵部分。決定繪制什么以及如何繪制成為對地域的刻意闡釋，這對于為設(shè)計干預(yù)提供可靠標(biāo)準(zhǔn)至關(guān)重要。

14 特內(nèi)里費島總體規(guī)劃（1988年）：同質(zhì)管控區(qū)域Tenerife Master Plan (1988): Areas of homogeneous regulation

總體規(guī)劃定義了4類同質(zhì)區(qū)域：自然價值區(qū)（山脈、峽谷、斜坡、巖溶地和平原）、森林價值區(qū)（成形的和潛在的）、沿海區(qū)（海岸和海域）和農(nóng)業(yè)利益區(qū)（含兩類）。同時還確定了戰(zhàn)略利益區(qū)域和其他城市區(qū)域。

在不同的歐洲區(qū)域規(guī)劃中（從荷蘭到意大利，從比利時到加泰羅尼亞），分層結(jié)構(gòu)已是共性的工作方法。最近的一些規(guī)劃更是力圖超越之前的層級并置，進(jìn)一步地交疊各層，考慮不同的尺度，并將其與潛在的轉(zhuǎn)型場景聯(lián)系起來。它們還力求使各個闡釋層、設(shè)計層和管控層相互依存，以突破為每塊土地賦予特定用途和特定建筑條件的傳統(tǒng)分區(qū)。

以此形成地域的重繪本，依次識別其地形、水文、坡度、方位和日照，以及與自然資源、公園、同質(zhì)景觀、溝壑和山脈等地標(biāo)性地貌相關(guān)的幾何形態(tài)數(shù)據(jù)，或者由可量化的具體數(shù)據(jù)定義的高保護(hù)價值森林區(qū)域。這種闡釋對于深入了解地域和發(fā)現(xiàn)其隱藏模式至關(guān)重要，也是設(shè)計提案的起點。

第二組圖（圖13、14）是對上一組圖（圖15）的定性闡釋，并且本著支持設(shè)計干預(yù)的意圖同步聯(lián)系各層。定量分析當(dāng)然是必要和有價值的，但如果不是在清晰合理的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)下的再闡釋，則存在不足。

13 特內(nèi)里費島總體規(guī)劃（1988年）：地域形態(tài)的辨析Tenerife Master Plan (1988): A careful recognition of the territorial morphology

這組或定量或定性的規(guī)劃文件因刻意包含了對轉(zhuǎn)型的闡釋，所以是動態(tài)的。它們是尋求認(rèn)知過程的文件。它們承載的非生物、生物和文化景觀類型的信息有助于我們?nèi)ダ斫膺@些類別中的哪些區(qū)域正在經(jīng)歷向其他階段的轉(zhuǎn)變（圖15）。

15 特內(nèi)里費島景觀總體規(guī)劃闡釋層Interpretative layers at the Tenerife Landscape Master Plan15-1 非生物層Abiotic layers15-2 生物層Biotic layer15-3 文化層Cultural layers15-4 具有視覺優(yōu)勢的非生物、生物和文化類別Abiotic, biotic and cultural categories with visual predominance15-5 從生物或非生物區(qū)域到文化區(qū)域，以及從文化區(qū)域到生物或非生物區(qū)域的變化Changes from biotic and abiotic to cultural areas(artificialized) and from cultural to biotic or abiotic15-6 視覺曝光度Visual exposure

3 巴格斯總體規(guī)劃：方法論的更新

在 巴 格 斯 總 體 規(guī) 劃（2003—2004年，圖16）中：第一層，即形態(tài)（或稱地域使命）層定義了一組作為管控和設(shè)計基礎(chǔ)的同質(zhì)區(qū)域，進(jìn)而轉(zhuǎn)譯環(huán)境基質(zhì)的要求，并在全域尺度上提出了一個開放空間系統(tǒng)；第二層設(shè)計不同場景所需的結(jié)構(gòu)性支撐，指明各區(qū)域流動性網(wǎng)絡(luò)和必要設(shè)施的狀況，以及未來城市發(fā)展方向，包括這些基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施的功能需求及其對未來增長的意義；第三層除了設(shè)計所謂戰(zhàn)略性地域項目的一些基本要素外，還提出了與前兩層密切相關(guān)的實體聚居地和經(jīng)濟(jì)活動的組織規(guī)則。關(guān)鍵是，3層中的每一層都不能單獨決定任何區(qū)域片段的命運，所有干預(yù)都必須由不同尺度的這3個層同步支配。

16 巴格斯總體規(guī)劃（2003—2004年）：巴格斯由30個市鎮(zhèn)組成Bages Master Plan (2003—2004): Bages region integrated by 30 municipalities

3.1 第一層：以地域形態(tài)作為一個規(guī)劃標(biāo)準(zhǔn)

第一層的主要目的應(yīng)該是關(guān)注地域的形態(tài)和使命，并作為成組分析的結(jié)果（圖17），為每個片段賦予類別、用途和可允許的實體性變化。為此首先分析了該地區(qū)的主要地質(zhì)、土壤、形態(tài)、地形和水文特征，以及源自農(nóng)業(yè)、畜牧業(yè)、林業(yè)、采礦業(yè)或其文化資源的變化。對自然棲息地和受保護(hù)空間以及高發(fā)意外風(fēng)險（沉降和重力不穩(wěn)定性、河流洪水或火災(zāi)）的研究有助于協(xié)調(diào)地域規(guī)劃和環(huán)境質(zhì)量要求。

17 巴格斯總體規(guī)劃（2003—2004年）：各項地域分析Bages Master Plan (2003—2004): Different territorial analysis

這些分析的基本目標(biāo)是詳細(xì)識別地域的形態(tài)和或多或少被改變的區(qū)域（圖18-1），并由此提出一個符合環(huán)境要求的開放空間結(jié)構(gòu)（圖18-2）。

18 巴格斯總體規(guī)劃（2003—2004年）：同質(zhì)管控區(qū)（18-1）和開放空間結(jié)構(gòu)（18-2）Bages Master Plan (2003—2004): Homogeneous regulation areas (18-1) and open spaces structure (18-2)

基于物理環(huán)境對地域規(guī)劃具有決定性的理念，第一層涵蓋了豐富多樣的闡釋。地域形態(tài)成為規(guī)劃設(shè)計的基本標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。只有經(jīng)過精細(xì)分析才能定義同質(zhì)管控區(qū)域，這是制定整個規(guī)劃的管控結(jié)構(gòu)的基礎(chǔ)。這些區(qū)劃必須關(guān)注每個地域片段的當(dāng)前形態(tài)和使命，識別和調(diào)整它們的使用潛力和條件。因而必須先定義每個片段的特征、追求目標(biāo)，及其影響地域規(guī)劃模式的方式。

以上分析驗證了在這一層的方法論創(chuàng)新，是在兼顧環(huán)境要求的前提下，通過劃分同質(zhì)區(qū)域和定義開放空間結(jié)構(gòu)來詳細(xì)識別和管控每個地域片段。但同時也必須與其他兩層關(guān)聯(lián)，即基于基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施和服務(wù)設(shè)計，及主要聚落或納入新經(jīng)濟(jì)活動的增長需求來制定合理改變某些同質(zhì)地域既定規(guī)則的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。

3.2 第二層：基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施的全域規(guī)劃

上一層中描述的方法也適用于建構(gòu)地域的線性元素或軸線，尤其是基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施。這些元素反映了各個流線的動態(tài)現(xiàn)實。盡管繪制一個物理現(xiàn)實并不難，但對它的量化分類卻不容易。在巴格斯總體規(guī)劃中，根據(jù)量化作用提出并繪制了4個層級的基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施，即分別參與構(gòu)成城市結(jié)構(gòu)、城市軸、城際軸和地域軸的部分。這一分類預(yù)示了最終提案。

這種規(guī)劃的創(chuàng)新性貢獻(xiàn)以及不同于從前規(guī)劃之處，在于以綜合的視野去規(guī)劃這些在地域和城市規(guī)劃中普遍起到結(jié)構(gòu)性作用的網(wǎng)絡(luò)。

科林·布坎南（1907—2001）早已提出，不僅針對基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施要素和城市規(guī)劃的討論具有重要性，“畫出”兩者的精確特征也非常重要[18]。因此，這些新總體規(guī)劃圖被用于測試調(diào)整后的公路和鐵路線布局（圖19），其詳細(xì)程度足以衡量它們與其他方面實體規(guī)劃決策的關(guān)系，以及使它們適應(yīng)每塊土地的物理和環(huán)境特點的方式。

19 巴格斯總體規(guī)劃（2003—2004年）：第二層Bages Master Plan (2003—2004): Second layer19-1 鐵路改線Railway alternatives19-2基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施場景Infrastructure scenarios

基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施決策必須確保其適當(dāng)?shù)墓δ芎徒?jīng)濟(jì)性。因此，巴格斯總體規(guī)劃對新道路和高速公路的布局進(jìn)行了詳細(xì)驗證，以求更佳精確地制定其預(yù)算以及評估其對城市發(fā)展的某些特定影響。第二層的設(shè)計與第一層的地域特征分析相關(guān)，同時基于前兩層對于決策活動或發(fā)展選項的意義，建立與下一層的聯(lián)系。

在第二層中，一些公路或鐵路提案都在尋求糾正不平衡，并提高網(wǎng)絡(luò)功能的邏輯性，而另一些則針對這些布局的結(jié)構(gòu)能力及其對城市規(guī)劃的顯著影響。因此，構(gòu)成支撐結(jié)構(gòu)性設(shè)計應(yīng)針對不同場景，即基于地域價值引導(dǎo)流動性和服務(wù)網(wǎng)絡(luò)的特征，同時兼顧未來的城市發(fā)展以及功能和環(huán)境的要求。

3.3 第三層：聚落和經(jīng)濟(jì)活動的組織

第三層針對那些可能影響區(qū)域項目的潛在經(jīng)濟(jì)動態(tài)（圖20-1），相應(yīng)提出了聚落和經(jīng)濟(jì)活動的實體布局規(guī)則以及所謂戰(zhàn)略性區(qū)域項目的基本要素的設(shè)計，評估了在不同場景下容納住房和經(jīng)濟(jì)活動所需的土地，還制定了未來開發(fā)的規(guī)則和標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。這些項目必須是協(xié)同運作的，根據(jù)公共交通網(wǎng)絡(luò)和活動節(jié)點進(jìn)行定位，具有合理的高密度以提供充足的設(shè)施和服務(wù)，與現(xiàn)有的城市肌理緊密相連，要有高比例的多類型、多社會階層和多功能混合的保障性住房，應(yīng)是居住和配套經(jīng)濟(jì)活動的混合體，還要適當(dāng)管控房價，以保證居住多樣性和維持社會凝聚力（圖20）。

20 巴格斯總體規(guī)劃（2003—2004年）：第三層Bages Master Plan (2003—2004): Third layer20-1 功能組團(tuán)Functional units20-2 在施規(guī)劃Current planning20-3 居住區(qū)整合Residential consolidation level

巴格斯總體規(guī)劃（圖21）在緊密結(jié)合各個闡釋層、設(shè)計層和管控層的基礎(chǔ)上深化了方法論。在設(shè)計尺度的不斷變化中，考慮了各種情景和策略以充分定位城市和地區(qū)，轉(zhuǎn)譯了環(huán)境基質(zhì)的要求，定義了區(qū)域開放空間系統(tǒng)，并在基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施的環(huán)境、功能、技術(shù)和經(jīng)濟(jì)要求之間尋求平衡，從而為城市發(fā)展提供了秩序[19-20]。

21 巴格斯總體規(guī)劃（2003—2004年）：因子分層的疊加Bages Master Plan (2003—2004): Superposition of layers

探索規(guī)劃模式和用于闡釋、設(shè)計和管控的工具，有助于根據(jù)開放、多樣化的場景想象地域的動態(tài)變化，這也是城市學(xué)科中最令人興奮的挑戰(zhàn)之一。

4 結(jié)論

地籍簿在大多數(shù)情況下被當(dāng)作描述性工具來使用，而在釜山案例中則別有用意。因而其繪圖并非展示既有現(xiàn)實，而是基于在一塊空白地上實現(xiàn)殖民的想法預(yù)設(shè)一個新城市，用以道路網(wǎng)格為基礎(chǔ)繪制的新布局抹除或企圖抹除既有的農(nóng)田形態(tài)，并代之以新活動。因此，一張精心制作的地圖背后隱藏著對一座城市的殖民統(tǒng)治，以及一個強(qiáng)加的、與以前的土地特征毫無關(guān)系的新秩序。

數(shù)十年后，在完全不同的情況下，特內(nèi)里費島和巴格斯的總體規(guī)劃再次用繪圖分析和記錄其地域特征，同時預(yù)設(shè)其歸宿。圖紙不僅用于描述地域，更是把區(qū)域項目組成部分的分層信息作為闡釋地域的工具，而這種闡釋正是區(qū)域規(guī)劃設(shè)計的主要基礎(chǔ)。

這3個案例展示了繪圖不僅可用于分析和描述的各種可能性，也是思考城市和地域未來的工具。通過分析這些圖紙，我們在其制成后的若干年仍能解釋當(dāng)時的文化產(chǎn)出背景，甚至是對地域的政治態(tài)度，進(jìn)而依據(jù)這些闡釋來發(fā)現(xiàn)地域可選擇的未來。

這些案例還展示了意識形態(tài)、制圖工具和對真實空間影響之間的不同關(guān)系。在釜山案例中，新制圖學(xué)在宣示主權(quán)和強(qiáng)加一個新秩序上扮演了關(guān)鍵角色，即在推廣新地圖的同時必然地抹除了原有的空間概念。在特內(nèi)里費島和巴格斯案例中，地圖的疊加變成認(rèn)知和澄清地域識別性的主要工具。這2個規(guī)劃有意通過不同的因子分層來實現(xiàn)空間闡釋的多樣化，并通過評估復(fù)雜的元素和關(guān)系來豐富地域的發(fā)展方向。

隨著制圖技術(shù)的發(fā)展，我們以為地圖就是對現(xiàn)實的同步再現(xiàn)，其表現(xiàn)越精準(zhǔn)，其內(nèi)容就越可靠，然而卻忽略了其隱藏意識形態(tài)的本質(zhì)。地圖的本質(zhì)是在不可能再現(xiàn)現(xiàn)實全貌的前提下，有選擇性地呈現(xiàn)一系列元素的現(xiàn)實手稿。在以上案例中，無論是預(yù)設(shè)還是設(shè)計的闡釋，繪圖都是傳遞和提出意圖的策略。

繪制空間已經(jīng)包含了對對象的闡釋。一張圖不僅反映對象的形狀，也包含看它的方式，以及有關(guān)如何詳細(xì)表現(xiàn)、消隱哪些內(nèi)容、如何成為傳輸價值的手段的抉擇。在反映、區(qū)分價值、表現(xiàn)理解和傳遞意圖的過程中，繪圖工具需要具備積極主動的特性。于是，手稿變成了編撰，地圖也變成了規(guī)劃。

因此，根據(jù)意識形態(tài)和技術(shù)，可能會有數(shù)千種不同的制圖。以不同的方式繪圖是為了提供一種新的空間理解。同樣，一個新的空間概念需要表現(xiàn)方法的創(chuàng)新。還原傳統(tǒng)表現(xiàn)方式和重釋當(dāng)代表現(xiàn)方式，是擴(kuò)展空間概念從而賦予世界多樣性的重要努力。而新技術(shù)的使用更是開啟了獲得新概念的可能性?？傊?，只有通過價值判斷、闡釋性閱讀和有意識的創(chuàng)作才能將繪圖變成一種設(shè)計工具。

注釋：

① 日本現(xiàn)代制圖學(xué)的發(fā)展先后受到英國、法國和德國軍隊的影響。

② 10年后，荷蘭第五期國土規(guī)劃（2000年）也采用了這種多層方法。盡管特內(nèi)里費和荷蘭之間存在顯著差異，但2個方案有某些相似之處。

③ 從東北到西南向的信風(fēng)定期從亞熱帶高壓帶吹到赤道低壓帶，使氣溫清涼，并從海平面延伸到海拔1 500或2 000 m。

圖片來源：

圖1、4引自韓國國立中央博物館、韓國學(xué)中央硏究院；圖2引自參考文獻(xiàn)[5][6]；圖3引自韓國學(xué)中央硏究院，由作者改繪；圖5引自韓國國立中央博物館、韓國學(xué)中央硏究院，由作者改繪；圖6引自韓國學(xué)中央硏究院；圖7、11引自韓國國家檔案館；圖8～10引自韓國國家檔案館，由作者改繪；圖12～21?CCRS、喬迪·弗蘭克薩。

（編輯/王一蘭）

Interpreting and Designing: Cadastre and Territory in Busan, Tenerife and Bages

Authors: (KOR) Meehwa Cho, (ARG/ESP) Melisa Pesoa, (ESP) Jordi Franquesa, (ESP) Joaquín Sabaté Translator: XIONG Xiangrui Proofreader: WANG Qin

The representation of the city and the territory has been the object of many efforts throughout the history of humanity and traces of cartography exist from 2500 BC[1]①. The map has traditionally been seen as a representation of reality or which was believed as reality. However, the relationship between this reality and its representation poses a basic problem, because cartography does not offer a neutral, aseptic image. Every map is produced in a certain cultural context. It is elaborated with specific techniques and objectives. On the other hand, the relationship between the represented object and the representation itself, never guarantees a mimesis: it is impossible to represent reality as we see it, simply because each subject sees it differently. The map thus offers us a vision of the world that is impossible to have with our own eyes, an image that allows us to encompass an invisible object with a simple glance. Therefore, if the map cannot represent reality, it becomes one of the many images that we can have about it, so that it is prudent, but above all interesting, to adopt a critical distance towards them[2]. The fact that no map is truthful or innocent does not make them useless, quite the contrary. In the field of urban and territorial planning, cartographic representations are an essential element in which we can read an interpretation of the world according to cultural,political or economic factors, which can help us understand, imagine and apprehend a space. In this sense, adopting a critical look at the graphic representations of the territory and the city feeds ways of understanding the territory that influence the way in which it is projected.

In this article we will focus on analysing this terrain that is halfway between representation and design in different contexts and times, which allows us to relate the idea of cartographic representation with project strategies. We will study three cases:Busan, in South Korea, the island of Tenerife, and Bages, a region of Catalonia, the two last in Spain.In each one of them, a way of representing the city and/or the territory is proposed through their comparison and common sharing. We want to verify the hypothesis that when we draw, we do not limit ourselves to expressing “what is” in that place, but that ideas or interpretations are also constructed and transmitted. In the words of Solà-Morales[3]:“Drawing is selecting, selecting is interpreting,interpreting is proposing” and the creative component goes through all three moments. In this article we will focus on this component.

1 Busan: From Property Structure to the Urban Design

1.1 The Arrival of a New Cartography in Korea

Modern cartography plays an essential and decisive role in the entire process of globalization between the 19th and 20th centuries, from the expeditions to Asia of the Western countries,the extension of the Japanese Empire and the colonization of Korea with its geographical annexation. The development of Japanese cartography through the introduction of Western technique during this period summarizes all the scientific effort that had been developed for centuries in Europe, since the Renaissance: creation of cartesian space, Cassini’s measurements in geodesic triangulation, invention of the contour lines, demarcation of territory as a basis of the modern State and application of cadastre in Paris,with the arrival of a new state after the French Revolution (Fig. 1). Napoleon, who yearned to revive a Roman Empire in France in the 19th century and played an important role in the spread of modern cartography through wars, did not have imagined that his strategy would be revived by the Japanese Empire in the opposite part of the world, in Korea.

After the occupation of Korea by the Japanese Empire, the object of cartography shifted from military action to colonial rule. The new government immediately carried out a land survey mapping throughout the country as the first strategy of colonial domination. It established a scientific basis for geographic annexation through a triangular network connecting Japan’s Tsushima Island with two other ones, Jeolyeong and Geoje, in Korea[4](Fig. 2). The cadastral map constitutes the legal basis for establishing exclusive land ownership, and a new tax system,subordinating Korea’s economy to the structure of nascent Japanese capitalism. “Historically, the population charts have been produced at times when the effective conquest of a new territory was possible, either because it was depopulated or the invader would erase any historical reference[7].”The new occupant did not want to leave any trace of previous traditions, including their language,culture, history or even geography in Korea.

We will briefly refer to traditional cartography and its spatial conceptions, to understand the new tool that replaces it, and how it alters the interpretation of space.

1.2 Traditional Space in the Previous Cartography

Opening through its port to international influence in the 19th century is not Korea’s first encounter with Western knowledge. In the 17th century arrived there a map of the western world by Matteo Ricci, a Jesuit missionary in China.Ricci believed that a world map is the most useful means to spread the Catholic faith[8]. This map of the Western world exerted a great influence and expanded the geographical knowledge in Korea.However, this does not mean that the traditional world view was replaced by the western one.Instead, the tension between representation of the traditional world and foreign trends was faced by expanding the existing world view in order to include new geographic knowledge[9].

In Korean national geography, the traditional interpretation understands the territory as a living organism. The mountain ranges and the water flow from Baekdu Mountain are described as a continuum, unlike in ancient maps of China or Japan[10]. The incorporation of the scale and the grid has become a common rule in the national cartographic production since the 18th century and culminates in Daedong Yeojido in 1861 (Fig. 3).At the regional and local level, there were diverse spatial conceptions and presentations according to the objective, as well as different agents participating in the production[11](Fig. 4). Above all, its spatial expression reflects the principles of Feng-shui,the logic of placing human activity in the natural environment related to wind (Feng) and water (Shui).

Although a humanist basis with a metaphorical explanation, its concerns are not so far from modern geography, taking into account the identification of favourable sites in terms of climate, defence and access to resources, to avoid cold winds in winter from the north with mountains and to take the fresh winds in summer from the south through rivers, for example. However,modern cartography rejects all these richness of understanding and spatial representation, replacing them with only one standard, the scientific one.

1.3 Superposing a New Space Through New Cartography

Busan, the south eastern extreme of the Korean peninsula, was the gateway to the invasion.The Japanese navy was shown up to the Korean coast with the pretext of marine measurements and provoked an armed conflict demanding the opening of the port. As a consequence in 1876 the port of Busan was opened, and Choryang Waegwan, the administrative facility built by the Korean government in 1678 to manage the relationship with Tsushima merchants, became a Japanese concession. The invasion started already at that time in Busan, even before the Residency-General , which would be established just after the victory in the Russo-Japanese War in 1905 and become the General Government in 1910.

Japan extends its domain by claiming land from the sea, demanding more and more concessions and buying land illegally (Fig. 5).Eventually, it drew a plan for a new city in 1906,based on a regular grid announcing building regulations by name of consul (Fig. 6). In other words, it anticipates in Busan the experiment of a modern city, decades before the General Government promotes urban improvement plans in Seoul, taking the reconstruction of Haussmann’s Paris as a model[12]. Then, this experiment would be institutionalized afterward by elaborating a cadastre in 1914, as a fixation of colonial rule.

1.4 New Cadastral Map and the Production of Modern Space

The Korean registry documents in the 19th century presented plots in a mere abstract scheme despite the precise measurement of its area. On the contrary, the new cadastral map determined the location of each parcel and the limits between them. It specifies borders of plots, either with a line that represented a physical element or an imaginary one that did not exist but in the cadastre (Fig. 7).However, these invisible lines begin to establish control over the real space, once fixed within the legal system. Based on land survey and cadastre production at the beginning of the colonization, the tax system was changed from the agricultural yield basis to the real estate property basis. Beyond this,the change in spatial conception had a much wider and deeper impact at socioeconomic and cultural level.

Drawing plots in an abstract scheme does not mean that the traditional Korean’s concept of borders was confusing and tenuous, but just different from the modern one. In the Joseon Dynasty period, Koreans thought that the value of the land derived from human labour on it,from cultivation. Therefore, the domain and boundary of a parcel was determined by the one who managed this land and by his ability to farm[13]. Thus, it was natural that cultivation rights prevailed over property rights. In addition, in this agricultural society, especially in the cultivation of rice paddy, both the land irrigation and the labour distribution were not carried out individually. It was more common to manage communal lands among neighbours and to assume taxes also in a communal way. However, the new registration system ignored and disarticulated all these units of socio-economic community, the collective spatial organization, the value system on land and labour, and the strong correlation between land and human beings.Consequently, it caused loss of territorial identity.

1.5 The Cadastral Map as an Urban Planning Tool

While the modern space was reorganized around the Busan port, the traditional centre,Dongnae, lost its function and symbolic role. This new spatial order became official in 1914 through the distinction of city and non-city in administrative districts: Busan-bu and Dongnae-gun. In addition,the cadastre was drawn at two different scales: the urban area (1∶600) and the general (1∶1,200),despite belonging to the same administrative unit,as the case of Yeongseon-dong (Fig. 8). In other words, there was a special effort in developing the urban area, even in terms of the cost and time spent on documenting detailed information.

Contrary to the general area, the urban area at scale 1∶600 draws a gridded road layout (Fig. 9).This grid covers the flat terrain, extending up to the 20 meters level, where the slope begins to rise and makes it difficult to continue the grid. The traditional villages which were located over the 20 m on the slope to make the best use of the flat terrain for agricultural production, lost their farmland by the imposition of the new urbanization, and became a periphery in the new context.

The cadastral map shows that the new centre,next to the port, had already been divided and built into narrow plots since the establishment of the concession with the increasing Japanese immigration.Meanwhile, on the other side of the port (Yeongseondong, urban area) it draws a geometric grid simply superimposing onto the existing agricultural plots(Fig. 10). Comparing it with the topographic map of 1924 (Fig. 11-1), it turns out that this grid on the cadastral map of 1914 constitutes in fact a “plan”,not yet executed, but as an advance of what will be done in the following decades.

“The domain of the land is not only assuming the new owner and control, but also drawing again the space[7].” This registration tool has not only changed the fiscal control, but also spatial order.Establishing an exclusive property register is the key for the capitalization of land. And what makes possible the production of modern space as an object of transaction is the precise measurement in the modern cartography. And these are the basis to regulate urbanization and buildings, the fundament of urban planning.

This project for a new city uses the cadastre as a tool for designing the city, based on a regular street system. However, there isn’t any idea expressed for land subdivision or building according to the street alignment. Although Japan quickly absorbed western knowledge for military purposes, they had hardly developed urban mapping until that moment. Unlike the 19th century Paris cadastral map, which drew building plans at scale 1∶200, the 20th century Busan map only indicated residential land use and did not even draw the outline of buildings. It seems obvious that there wasn’t an understanding about the correlation between building typology and the form of the plot or among the fa?ade, the plot and the street alignment. Ironically, this plan leaves traces of preexistence because of being incomplete, and for now the cadastral map becomes the best historical document to recover the traditional space.

On the other hand, this plan generated a spatial discrimination in two different structures:Japanese in the central city and Koreans displaced to the outskirts. This situation not only pushed marginalized people out of modernization, but erased their entire existence on the map by drawing only the new project and ignoring the previous structures. The plan in 1928 (Fig. 11-2), deliberately erases existing villages replacing them by contour lines. It imposes a new urban structure and expels traditional villages to the periphery, eventually erasing them from official documents and thus considering them illegal and anomalous. The recovery of these ignored traditional spaces will only be possible by mapping them. Thus we will understand that “the tradition of the oppressed culture teaches us that the ‘state of exception’ in which we now live is in fact the rule[14].”

2 The Tenerife Master Plan, an Essay on Interpreting the Territory Through Layers

Three quarters of a century later, the planning crisis forces from certainty to complexity. Some of the most interesting territorial plans try to face this complexity through an intentional interpretation of the territory and through the definition of scenarios. Complexity requires interpreting the territory through different layers, while taking into account that these layers are often interrelated. In fact, physical support, which is the fundamental object of study, constitutes the starting point for determining different strategies and interventions.

At the end of the 80s, the Tenerife Master Plan (Plan Insular de Ordenación Territorial de Tenerife, PIOT) introduced a “multilayer” structure of interpretation and proposal②(Fig. 12): a first layer based on careful recognition of the territorial morphology (Fig. 13), on the definition of the elements that built up its structure, its environmental matrix and the system of open spaces; a second layer focused on the design of infrastructure networks (essentially mobility, road and rail routes, but also telecommunications, water supply, waste treatment, among others), and a third one, which deals with the structure of the main settlements and economic activities (residential,industrial, tertiary, logistics, mining or agriculture).

Tenerife (3,000 km2) is one of the seven Canary Islands, located in the middle of the Atlantic, and bathed by the Gulf Stream and by thealisios③, which provokes a spring-like temperature all over the year. The volcano Teide rises more than 3,700 meters, reducing the useful area of the island that accommodates 750,000 residents and five million tourists a year.

The Master Plan starts with a detailed description of the territorial morphology, and with an exhaustive analysis of the transformations that have taken place since the post-war period. The reference to “Design with Nature”[15]is clear by observing this layer’s structure. But what in that seminal work was used with the exclusive purpose of measuring the capacity supporting certain activities or, at most, in order to assess a certain physical intervention (such as a new highway), in the Master Plan is intended to be used as a tool not only for analysis, or for measuring the “vocations”of the territory, but also for designing and regulating its transformation[16-17].

In this sense, this layer interpretation tries to determine areas of homogeneous regulation (Fig. 14),a mechanism that already forms an essential part of the proposal. Deciding what to draw and how to do it becomes an intentional interpretation of the territory, which will be essential to intervene in it with a solid criterion.

The Master plan defines four types of homogeneous areas: natural ones (mountains,ravines, slopes, karstic lands and plains), forest(consolidated and potential), coastal (coast and marine), and agricultural (with two different categories). At the same time, areas of strategic interest and other urban areas are defined.

In different European plans (from the Netherlands to Italy, from Belgium to Catalonia) this layer’s structure constitutes today a common feature.And some recent plans aim to advance beyond this initial juxtaposition of layers; to continuously cross them, to consider different scales and to relate them to potential transformation scenarios. It also aims that these interpretation, design and regulation layers become absolutely interdependent and that this allows overcoming the traditional zoning that attributes to each piece of land a specific use and specific building conditions.

With this, the territorial palimpsest is reconstructed, recognizing successively its relief and hydrography, the slopes, orientation and sunlight,as well as geomorphological data associated with natural resources, parks and homogeneous landscapes, morphological landmarks such as ravines and mountains, or areas of forest value,that are defined with quantifiable and specific data.This interpretation is essential to read the territory,to discover patterns that often remain hidden, and becomes the starting point of the proposal.

A second group of maps, which we could call qualitative, start from a reinterpretation of the first ones, linking different layers simultaneously, and where the intentional, in this case, subjective gaze,supports the design intervention of the project.The quantitative analysis is essential and valuable,but it is at the same time insufficient if it is not duly reinterpreted under clear and reasonable criteria that derive from a careful understanding.

This documentation, quantitative or qualitative and intentional, includes the interpretation of transformations and is, therefore, dynamic. They are documents that seek to recognize processes.In this sense, those who tell us about the abiotic,biotic and cultural landscape typologies help understanding which areas of each of these categories are undergoing transformations towards the other stages (Fig. 15).

3 The Bages Master Plan, a Methodological Renewal

In the Bages Master Plan (2003–2004, Fig. 16)— drawn up by the same team as the PIOT — , the morphological (or territory vocations) layer defines a set of homogeneous areas, which are an essential basis for regulation and designing; translates the requirements of the environmental matrix and includes the proposal for an open spaces system at a territorial scale. The second layer designs the needed structural support in different scenarios,guides the conditions of the mobility networks and the demanded facilities of each territory and future urban developments on them, and it attends to the functional requirements of those infrastructures,but also to their implications on future growth.The third layer proposes, in close relation to the previous ones, the rules of physical organization of settlements and economic activities, in addition to designing some basic elements of the so-called strategic territorial projects. The fundamental question is that none of these three layers determines by itself the destiny of any fragment of the territory, but that all intervention is ruled simultaneously by the three and from different scales of approximation.

3.1 First Layer: The Shape of the Territory as a Planning Criterion

The main purpose of the first layer should be to pay attention to the form and vocations of the territory, and as a result of a set of analyses (Fig. 17),attribute to each fragment of it a category, uses and admitted physical transformations. In order to do so, the main geological and subsoil, morphological,topographical and hydrological characteristics of the territory are analysed, so as the transformations derived from its agriculture, livestock, forestry,mining, or their cultural resources. The study of the natural habitats and protected spaces, as well as the risks with the greatest territorial incidence(subsidence and gravitational instabilities, river floods or fires) facilitates reconciliation between territorial planning and environmental quality requirements.

The fundamental objective of these analyses is to carefully recognize the territorial morphology(Fig. 18-1), the more or less transformed areas and to propose, as a result of all this, a structure of open spaces (Fig. 18-2), attentive to environmental requirements.

This first layer, nourished by a rich diversity of interpretations, is based on the conviction of the decisive importance of the physical environment in any territorial plan. The morphology of the territory becomes the fundamental criterion of the design proposal. Therefore, careful analyses are carried out to allow the definition of areas of homogeneous regulation, the fundamental basis of the normative structure of the plan. These areas must attend to the current form and vocation of each fragment of the territory, recognize and regulate their aptitudes and conditions of use. In this sense, their characteristics, pursued goals and the way in which each piece contributes to the territorial planning model must be defined.

By analysing the content of this first layer, we verify that their main methodological innovations are the recognition and detailed regulation of each fragment of the territory through the delimitation of areas with homogeneous characteristics and the definition of an open spaces structure, both attentive to environmental demands. But at the same time, its interrelation with the other two layers is already pointed out, by defining the criteria to reasonably alter, in certain homogeneous areas,the established rules, based on the design of infrastructures and services, the growth needs of the main settlements, or to house new economic activities.

3.2 Second Layer: Territorial Planning of Infrastructures

The approaches described in the previous layer, are also applicable to the linear elements or axes that structure the territory, especially the infrastructures. These elements also tell us about the dynamic realities of flows. It is worth insisting that, despite the fact that the drawing of a physical reality is quite easy, the decision of the scalar classification of this reality is not. In this sense, in the Bages Master Plan, four levels of infrastructure are proposed and graphed according to their scalar role: those forming part of the urban fabric, the axes that structure urban nuclei, the interurban ones and the territorial axes. This classification anticipates the final proposal.

What is the substance of the objectives and criteria that will guide the interventions related to the road and railway structure, and what are their possible innovative contributions? What differentiates these new territorial plans from previous ones?

The answer is that they are based on the structuring role that these networks have in any territorial and urban plan, and in the convenience of approaching them from a comprehensive vision.

Colin Buchanan has already taught us about the importance not only of approaching the discussion of infrastructure elements and urban planning, but also of “drawing” the precise characteristics of one and the other[18]. Thus, these new master plans are used to test the adjusted layout of road and railway axes (Fig. 19), sufficiently detailed, to measure their relationship with the physical planning decisions of certain sectors, or the way in which they adapt to the physical and environmental characteristics of every piece of land.

Infrastructural decisions must ensure their appropriate functional and economic adequacy.Thus, in the Bages Master Plan, the layout of new roads and highways are verified in detail, at a sufficient level, to approximate their cost and their repercussions on certain urban developments. Their design is related to the territorial characteristics analysed in the first layer. But at the same time, the implication of these two layers in decisions about activities, or about growth options is considered.That means establishing relations with the next layer.

In this second layer, many of the road or railway proposals seek to correct imbalances and to introduce improvements in the functional logic of the networks. But many other proposals are raised in response to the structuring capacity of these layouts and their marked impact on urban planning.Therefore, the design of the needed structural support in different scenarios is addressed, guiding the characteristics of the mobility and service networks, based on the territorial values; but also attending to future urban developments and functional and environmental requirements.

3.3 Third Layer: Settlements and Economic Activities Organization

The third layer faces the potential economic dynamics that may affect the territorial project(Fig. 20-1). Therefore it proposes the rules of the physical arrangement of settlements and economic activities and the design of basic elements of the so-called strategic territorial projects. It evaluates the needed land to accommodate housing and economic activities in different scenarios. The rules and criteria of future growth are also established. They must be concerted operations;located according to the public transport network and activity nodes; with reasonable high densities that enable the adequate provision of facilities and services; in strict contiguity with the existing urban fabrics; with a high proportion of subsidized housing, mixed in terms of typologies, social classes and functions; mixture of residence and compatible economic activity; and an adequate control of residential offer, which guarantees its diversification and the maintenance of social cohesion (Fig. 20).

These new master plans, and specifically the example that we have taken as a reference, the Bages Master Plan (Fig. 21), deepen in methodological approach based on the combination of closely interrelated layers of interpretation, design and regulation; in continuous changes of design scales;in the consideration of diverse scenarios and strategies to adequately position cities and territories;in translating the requirements of the environmental matrix, defining a territorial open spaces system and searching a balance between the environmental,functional, technical and economic requirements of infrastructures, with their contribution providing order to urban growth[19-20].

And they do so with an absolute confidence that searching planning models and tools for interpreting, designing and regulating, which help imagining the transformation of dynamic territories, according to diverse and very open scenarios, is one of the most exciting challenges of our urban discipline.

4 Conclusions

The cadastre, a tool used in many parts of the world as a descriptive tool, was used in Busan with a prospective aim. The drawing not only shows the existing reality of a territory but also a prefiguration of the new city, based on the idea of colonization over a land seen as a tabula rasa. The new layout,based on a grid of streets, erased (or intended to)the existing patterns of agricultural lands for the implementation of new activities. Thus, a drawing that in principle has a technical and precise goal hides a colonial domination over a city and the imposition of an idea of a new order that has little to do with previous land features.

The PIOT and the Bages Master Plan,several decades later, and in a completely different situation, use drawing again to analyse and register features of a territory, but also to prefigurate its destiny. We take advantage of drawing as a tool to interpret the territory and not only to describe it, by using different layers of information that become part of the actual project for the territory.Therefore, that interpretation becomes the main basis for the territorial design.

The three cases are just a sample of the infinite possibilities of drawing used as a tool of analysis and description, but also as a tool for thinking about the future of territories and cities.By analysing these drawings, several years after their production allows us also to interpret contexts of cultural production or even political attitudes to the territory. But again, through this interpretation, we can find their alternative futures.

These cases show different relationships between ideologies, cartography as a tool,and impacts on real space. In Busan, the new cartography plays a key role in the announcement of a new domain and the imposition of a new order. This process inevitably erases previous spatial conceptions, prevailing the newly imposed.In Tenerife and Bages, superposition of maps becomes the main tool to recognize and claim the identity of the territory. They intentionally diversify spatial interpretation through different layers and enrich the territorial destiny by evaluating complex elements and relationships.

As the technique of cartography develops,we tend to consider the map as an identical representation of reality and the more accurate its representation, the more reliable its content without realizing its hidden ideological nature. However, the nature of a map is a transcription of reality within the impossibility of representing it as a whole,but as a result of a series of selective decisions of elements. In the analysed cases, this is used as a strategy to transmit and even propose an intention through mapping, whether it is a prefiguration or a designed interpretation.

Drawing the space already incorporates an interpretation about the object. A drawing not only contains the shape of the object but also the way of looking at it, and the decisions of what to present in detail, what to silence, and how to draw becomes a means of transmitting values. In the process of mapping, distinguishing different values,representing this understanding and communicating an intentional idea, the tool acquires a proactive character. So, the transcription becomes a redaction and the map a plan.

Therefore, there can be thousands of different cartographies depending on the ideology and technique. To map differently is to offer a new spatial understanding. Likewise, a new spatial conception requires an innovation of representation. Recovering the traditional ways of representation and reinterpreting the current ones are significant efforts to expand our spatial conception, thus diversifying the world. And the use of new technologies opens the possibility of acquiring new conceptions. However, turning it into a design tool is only possible through values judgment, interpretive reading and intentional writing.

Notes:

① Japan developed the knowledge of modern cartography initially with the influence of the British and the French army and later the German.

② This multilayer approach was also adopted, a decade later, in the Dutch 5th Note (2000). Despite the notable differences between Tenerife and the Netherlands, there are certain similarities in both experiences.

③ Trade winds that blow regularly from northeast to southwest from the subtropical high pressures to the equatorial low pressures, refreshing the temperatures. They extend from sea level to 1,500 or 2,000 meters above sea level.

Sources of Figures:

Fig. 1, 4 source: National Museum of Korea, Academy of Korean Studies; Fig. 2 source: reference[5][6]; Fig. 3 source: Academy of Korean Studies, own elaboration;Fig. 5 source: National Museum of Korea, Academy of Korean Studies, own elaboration; Fig. 6 source: Academy of Korean Studies; Fig. 7 11 source: National Archives of Korea; Fig. 8-10 source: National Archives of Korea, own elaboration; Fig. 12-21 ? CCRS and Joaquín Sabaté.

(Editor / WANG Yilan)