城市公共廣場(chǎng)的空間記憶—匈牙利·肖普朗鎮(zhèn)歷史城市中心的再生

著：（匈牙利）列文特·薩博 譯：張忍圖 校：胡一可

1 打個(gè)比方：公共廣場(chǎng)是過去的化石

今天的路網(wǎng)、聚落結(jié)構(gòu)以及歐洲那些歷史悠久的城鎮(zhèn)中存在的一些大型且相互聯(lián)系的公共空間，通常是由已經(jīng)存在了數(shù)個(gè)世紀(jì)或幾千年的自然或人造結(jié)構(gòu)決定的。城市在緩慢而有機(jī)地發(fā)展，使其得以保存、改造，而且不管是在整體上還是從某種程度上來說它都可以作為文化遺產(chǎn)，因?yàn)闊o論是將這些具有功能性的特征消除還是轉(zhuǎn)換，均需投入很高的成本。如今，在21世紀(jì)的前半葉，高密度和多層次的城市肌理的介入使得這些因素變得鮮活起來—無論精神層面還是物質(zhì)層面—對(duì)于設(shè)計(jì)師來說都是如此，這些因素比當(dāng)前的關(guān)注和利益更加重要，例如城鎮(zhèn)中作為文化遺產(chǎn)的區(qū)域。

在歐洲的城市（但不限于僅在歐洲大陸出現(xiàn)的案例）中，我們可以找到許多例子來說明這種緩慢、有機(jī)的發(fā)展和變化過程。在研究之初，先介紹一個(gè)非常著名的案例，那就是位于意大利羅馬歷史中心的納沃納廣場(chǎng)（Piazza Navona）[1]。該廣場(chǎng)通過導(dǎo)游手冊(cè)和密集的古跡而為人熟知，其中的建筑和噴泉—是最偉大的設(shè)計(jì)師的獨(dú)創(chuàng)作品—親密共處。但是，在現(xiàn)場(chǎng)進(jìn)行親身體驗(yàn)會(huì)有怎樣的感受呢？當(dāng)置身其中，我最感興趣的是它的空間形式起源。在1886年對(duì)外開放的納沃納廣場(chǎng)上曾經(jīng)矗立著羅馬帝國(guó)皇帝圖密善（Domitianus）的體育場(chǎng)，這座體育場(chǎng)曾經(jīng)擁有15 000個(gè)座位，它的空間特征和印記甚至在2 000年后的今天還決定了廣場(chǎng)的結(jié)構(gòu)、空間以及氛圍（圖1）。如今，這座長(zhǎng)270m寬55m的前競(jìng)技場(chǎng)成為了一個(gè)公共廣場(chǎng)，擠滿了熙熙攘攘的游客。廣場(chǎng)邊緣的墻壁下曾經(jīng)有一些商店和作坊—位于圖密善體育場(chǎng)的廢墟之間—現(xiàn)在被教堂和宮殿包圍。因此，它現(xiàn)今所呈現(xiàn)出來的空間構(gòu)成和形式是由近2 000年的古跡和藝術(shù)品的更迭所決定的。盡管廣場(chǎng)歷經(jīng)改造，并出現(xiàn)了新的建筑和大噴泉，但它的空間形態(tài)卻未曾更改。今天，這個(gè)昔日的體育競(jìng)技場(chǎng)，隨后的馬術(shù)比賽場(chǎng)、嘉年華和馬戲團(tuán)表演場(chǎng)，以及后來的市場(chǎng)和集市，成為了著名的旅游勝地，也是羅馬最重要的歷史遺跡之一。當(dāng)然，一個(gè)場(chǎng)所的歷史不僅僅是它的空間結(jié)構(gòu)和形式，還有屬于自己的故事，比如博羅米尼（Borromini）的圣埃格尼斯教堂（Sant’ Agnese in Agone），它是為了紀(jì)念基督徒遭受迫害期間在圖密善體育場(chǎng)殉道的圣埃格尼斯（Saint Agnes）。歷經(jīng)2 000年，建筑物在不斷地發(fā)展和改變，使用功能也發(fā)生了變化，然而即使在今天，場(chǎng)所的起源、前身、歷史和傳統(tǒng)依然易于解讀。當(dāng)然，還有很多與納沃納廣場(chǎng)相似的歷史遺跡，在那里，城市已經(jīng)進(jìn)行了有機(jī)更新和自組織發(fā)展，通過這種方式保留了場(chǎng)所空間的演變歷程。在這些案例中，往事和記憶與特定的建筑作品無關(guān)，也與建筑組群無關(guān)，而與城市、城市尺度的發(fā)展和緩慢轉(zhuǎn)變有關(guān)，這通常是歷史城市本身的一種集體創(chuàng)造。

當(dāng)我們對(duì)匈牙利西部的肖普朗鎮(zhèn)進(jìn)行重要?dú)v史公共空間規(guī)劃設(shè)計(jì)并協(xié)助實(shí)施時(shí)，我們參考借鑒了這座奇妙的歷史性公共廣場(chǎng)（當(dāng)然還有許多其他的公共空間。然而，這一歷史性的相似卻為新的觀念指明了方向。項(xiàng)目的前期工作是由建筑師、景觀設(shè)計(jì)師、交通和公用設(shè)備工程師組成的團(tuán)隊(duì)進(jìn)行的跨學(xué)科研究；我們的設(shè)計(jì)原則以及之后的整個(gè)設(shè)計(jì)過程都借鑒了該項(xiàng)研究的成果（圖2）①。

1 納沃納廣場(chǎng)鳥瞰圖Piazza Navona aerial view

2 匈牙利西部典型的歷史城鎮(zhèn)：肖普朗鎮(zhèn)及其城堡街

坐落在奧匈帝國(guó)（Austrian-Hungarian）邊境上的肖普朗鎮(zhèn)是匈牙利歷史上最富有的一個(gè)小鎮(zhèn)。這座羅馬帝國(guó)時(shí)期的重要城鎮(zhèn)當(dāng)時(shí)被稱作斯卡巴提亞（Scarbantia），早在史前時(shí)期就已經(jīng)有人居住了，但是在這段歷史時(shí)期，它一直是該地區(qū)的主導(dǎo)城鎮(zhèn)[2]。時(shí)至今日，這所歷史名城的核心仍然受限于13世紀(jì)在古羅馬帝國(guó)基礎(chǔ)上建立的城墻。基于第一次世界大戰(zhàn)結(jié)束的和平條約，當(dāng)?shù)氐墓裢镀睕Q定了這座城市的歸屬—選擇留在匈牙利而不是鄰國(guó)奧地利。關(guān)于這個(gè)決定的記憶也在城市的慣稱中保留了下來：最忠誠(chéng)的城鎮(zhèn)（civitas fidelissima）。這座歷史城鎮(zhèn)中心的形狀，總讓人想起洋蔥的結(jié)構(gòu)，仍然支配著城市的核心道路網(wǎng)、土地劃分、街道比例和空間氛圍。城墻內(nèi)外是2個(gè)截然不同的世界[3]。當(dāng)中世紀(jì)的樓宇，狹窄、蜿蜒的街道和居住房屋擠滿了城墻內(nèi)的區(qū)域時(shí)，公共空間兩側(cè)寬敞的底層空間—今天我們把這里稱為城堡街,由之前沿著城墻的護(hù)城河填筑后發(fā)展而來—一直保持著其服務(wù)功能（圖3）。

肖普朗的城堡街（Várk?rút）是一條寬達(dá) 40～60m 的林蔭大道，坐落在護(hù)城河外側(cè)的坡地上，環(huán)繞著歷史城鎮(zhèn)的中心[4]。如今這條以城堡街聞名的林蔭大道擁有最大的城堡集中區(qū)域，然而，地塊上成行排列的建筑卻來自于不同的歷史時(shí)期。外圍遠(yuǎn)離城墻的建筑修建于中世紀(jì)，相關(guān)記錄首次出現(xiàn)于1400年。內(nèi)側(cè)建筑則很晚才出現(xiàn)在歷史記錄中。據(jù)派爾編年史（the Payr Chronicle）記載，早在17世紀(jì)初城堡的護(hù)城河邊就出現(xiàn)了沿河布置的攤位。1676年大火之后，沿河攤位的數(shù)量增加，城市也從這一地塊中獲取了大量的利潤(rùn)[5]。城市土地被業(yè)主們逐步購(gòu)買和開發(fā)，除了木制建筑外，他們也建造了永久性的石筑建筑。曾經(jīng)建立在護(hù)城河上的倉(cāng)庫(kù)已與商店合并，而底層帶商鋪的住宅則成為城堡街的經(jīng)典而留存至今。護(hù)城河在庫(kù)魯克（the Kuruc）圍城戰(zhàn)之后失去了防御功能，后來被填筑，從此成為商業(yè)場(chǎng)所。1776年，只有內(nèi)側(cè)的一排建筑成為格拉本大街（Grabenrunde）的界面，如今整個(gè)城堡街所使用的名字“格拉本”在1869年才開始被廣泛接受[6]。到18世紀(jì)末，城堡街的立面改造活動(dòng)日益頻繁，導(dǎo)致洛可可和路易十六風(fēng)格建筑的大量出現(xiàn)（其中大部分建筑毀于二戰(zhàn)的1944—1945年間）。最后，在19世紀(jì)，許多這樣的小房子被賦予了浪漫主義色彩。1900—1923年間，肖普朗的電車軌道線（作為匈牙利米軌電氣化公交網(wǎng)絡(luò)的一部分）穿越該區(qū)域，雖與今日城市的風(fēng)采不同，但當(dāng)時(shí)的明信片見證了交通設(shè)施的發(fā)展歷程。在1941—1944年間，曾經(jīng)由鵝卵石鋪就的城堡街變成了一條介于Ikvahíd街和árpád街之間的三車道機(jī)動(dòng)車路（中間是行車道，兩側(cè)為便道）。1945年以后，場(chǎng)地中的建筑被重新編號(hào)，1949年這條街被改名為L(zhǎng)enin k?rút，直到1989年 10月31日蘇聯(lián)入侵的戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)結(jié)束，它才恢復(fù)了原來的名字。

就像沃納沃廣場(chǎng)保留了羅馬時(shí)期圖密善體育場(chǎng)的遺跡一樣，本項(xiàng)目中，城墻揭示了護(hù)城河系統(tǒng)的空間性，并融于肖普朗的城市結(jié)構(gòu)中。如同化石檢測(cè)一般：這座城市充滿了防御工程的遺跡。而這類空間形式的創(chuàng)建是有機(jī)城市發(fā)展的優(yōu)秀范例。

在城堡街復(fù)興運(yùn)動(dòng)開始之前，場(chǎng)地現(xiàn)狀早在20世紀(jì)中葉就已形成。當(dāng)時(shí)，交通系統(tǒng)的規(guī)劃發(fā)展是基于Pál Boronkai已有的規(guī)劃—道路總是沿著擋土墻而建，形成組織嚴(yán)密而又彼此分離的交通路線（便道）。以機(jī)動(dòng)車交通為主導(dǎo)的規(guī)劃限制了人行交通，同時(shí)將曾經(jīng)連續(xù)的空間縱向分割。設(shè)有交通指示燈的十字路口、輔路以及在路上穿行著尋找停車位的機(jī)動(dòng)車等，都將行人可行走的空間限制到一條極其狹窄的沿著擋土墻的小路上。主要道路從久爾（Gy?r）開始，穿過城堡街最后到達(dá)維也納（Vienna），這一工程布局系統(tǒng)與二戰(zhàn)后的發(fā)展情況相適應(yīng)[7]。事實(shí)上，在更新之前整條城堡街是連片的停車場(chǎng)。城市中大量廣闊的公共空間和大型廣場(chǎng)被過度建設(shè)和連接：整個(gè)區(qū)域充滿了擋土墻、道路和遮擋視線的綠籬。在城堡街建筑的底層，酒店和商業(yè)的傳統(tǒng)功能仍然處于主導(dǎo)地位，沒有附屬的公共空間與其相連接（例如露臺(tái)咖啡廳、戶外餐飲區(qū)）。公共廣場(chǎng)的建筑元素（歷史建筑）處于一種低審美、低科技的狀態(tài)，也缺乏能使城堡街具有識(shí)別性的單一且完整的空間形象。圣母瑪利亞石像（the statue of Virgin Mary）和忠誠(chéng)之泉（the Fountain of Loyalty）之間的區(qū)域是肖普朗最重要的公共空間。然而，它被擋土墻和臺(tái)階分割成了2個(gè)不均衡的區(qū)域（圖4、5）。

3 跨學(xué)科研究的背景、過程以及方法

雖然對(duì)場(chǎng)地（歷史、地形和形態(tài)）的定位、功能、社會(huì)環(huán)境等方面的初步研究是任何建筑設(shè)計(jì)過程中不可或缺的步驟，在基于豐富且復(fù)雜的歷史層次以及相應(yīng)的城市肌理進(jìn)行設(shè)計(jì)時(shí)更是如此。在肖普朗城堡街漫長(zhǎng)的籌備和規(guī)劃過程中，以上因素在工程方面均得到了充分的考慮，從而形成了一個(gè)具有跨學(xué)科性質(zhì)的研究過程。

設(shè)計(jì)前期強(qiáng)調(diào)應(yīng)用研究（而非基礎(chǔ)研究）非常重要，因?yàn)檠芯康母鱾€(gè)方面及成果與設(shè)計(jì)草圖的備選方案直接相關(guān)，并嵌入在設(shè)計(jì)決策之中。在回顧整個(gè)過程時(shí)，我們可以就真正的研究型設(shè)計(jì)展開討論，最終的規(guī)劃決策依據(jù)研究的問題及相應(yīng)結(jié)果而產(chǎn)生，復(fù)雜的公共空間振興計(jì)劃本身就是通過這種方式實(shí)現(xiàn)的。

我們以該鎮(zhèn)的城市形態(tài)、結(jié)構(gòu)和歷史的初步探索作為研究背景。背景材料以及城市綜合發(fā)展策略成為制定整個(gè)城市全面概念的基礎(chǔ)，意味著對(duì)這些抽象資料的處理是我們?cè)谠O(shè)計(jì)階段的首要任務(wù)。此外，也不能過分夸大現(xiàn)場(chǎng)分析的作用。在對(duì)初始資料進(jìn)行抽象總結(jié)之后，設(shè)計(jì)團(tuán)隊(duì)在設(shè)計(jì)區(qū)域及其毗鄰地區(qū)進(jìn)行多次訪問和調(diào)查期間，采用了非常切實(shí)而具體的方式，即觀察法，并準(zhǔn)備了場(chǎng)地的圖表資料，試圖總結(jié)出該地區(qū)的主要問題和潛力。SWOT分析法同樣對(duì)我們有所幫助：在研究初期，我們總結(jié)了優(yōu)勢(shì)—弱點(diǎn)—潛力—風(fēng)險(xiǎn)矩陣。在我們進(jìn)行設(shè)計(jì)干預(yù)之前，該地區(qū)的嚴(yán)重問題是在SWOT分析法的基礎(chǔ)上確定的，具體如下[8-9]：

1）超載的交通切斷了城堡街內(nèi)外的弧形線路，巨大的公共空間使用情況也不容樂觀。

2）除了市中心風(fēng)景如畫的狹窄街道之外，沒有公共空間可以作為城市空間為公眾提供開放且整潔的環(huán)境。

3）該區(qū)域綠地匱乏。

4）缺乏能使城堡街充滿城市的繁華和生機(jī)所需的多面且精致的城市空間品質(zhì)。場(chǎng)地中仍然存在著一些功能可以將廣場(chǎng)變成活動(dòng)空間，比如歷史悠久的集市。

5）街道兩側(cè)建筑底層的功能結(jié)構(gòu)過于松散，也因?yàn)楣部臻g不盡如人意—基本上僅限于2條人行道—所以不鼓勵(lì)城市服務(wù)設(shè)施（通常為餐飲）的所有權(quán)和功能的改變。

起初，場(chǎng)地的巨大潛力可以從以下因素中獲得：

6）城堡街承載著串聯(lián)城市空間的功能，事實(shí)證明它將對(duì)擴(kuò)大城市公共空間范圍做出巨大貢獻(xiàn)。

7）城堡街的特點(diǎn)是擁有令人興奮但未得到充分利用的景觀環(huán)境。

8）該區(qū)域的特征（寬度和長(zhǎng)度的比例關(guān)系）使它可以形成更加連貫的城市綠地，其中的植物以密植為主。

9）成熟的發(fā)展概念有望成為形成肖普朗形象的決定性因素。

10）通過布局的概念創(chuàng)新，兩側(cè)的沿街立面以及建筑和城市景觀造就了該地區(qū)的美學(xué)價(jià)值。

進(jìn)一步的研究在過程和方法方面得到了相關(guān)學(xué)科的支持。一方面，我們完成了建筑空間結(jié)構(gòu)的歷史研究，并在此基礎(chǔ)上分析了城堡街作為公共空間的發(fā)展歷程、空間位置關(guān)系、各個(gè)時(shí)期的空間使用及其動(dòng)態(tài)變化。我們團(tuán)隊(duì)的交通工程師在設(shè)計(jì)區(qū)域及其毗鄰地帶進(jìn)行了交通流量統(tǒng)計(jì)，以便記錄規(guī)劃前期的狀態(tài)，同時(shí)也為了獲得在此條件下公共場(chǎng)所重建后的基本信息。通過支路干預(yù)最大限度地減少設(shè)計(jì)區(qū)域（城堡街，即環(huán)繞市中心的林蔭道中最寬闊的區(qū)域）的過境交通量，并且轉(zhuǎn)移大量車流的方式是可能的。與此同時(shí)，在道路網(wǎng)絡(luò)繞過已經(jīng)形成的城市中心之前，有必要將直達(dá)市中心另一側(cè)的林蔭大道改造為雙向車道，以使其吸納過境交通。然而，這種干預(yù)必須要進(jìn)行非常周密的交通建模，在此期間，我們也確信并且可以說服決策者們相信這種重大的交通工程干預(yù)，即城市交通重組，在不對(duì)其外部區(qū)域造成不利影響和破壞的條件下將會(huì)使設(shè)計(jì)區(qū)域受益。

在平面層面、二維空間研究和同類城市尺度的規(guī)劃設(shè)計(jì)，以及在人視點(diǎn)可感知獲得的實(shí)況之間存在著基本有序的強(qiáng)關(guān)聯(lián)性。出于該原因也為了給決策者或各種論壇提供清晰可辨的可視化材料，我們拍攝了行人高度以上8～10m的高視角照片，由于特殊的視點(diǎn)高度，產(chǎn)生的照片同時(shí)具有頂視圖和透視圖的優(yōu)點(diǎn)。無論如何，這些圖像已經(jīng)證明了它們對(duì)演示文稿而言是不可或缺的，而且也適用于我們的場(chǎng)地分析。

在規(guī)劃過程中，我們多次參加了以參與式設(shè)計(jì)聞名的論壇和討論，在那里，我們通過關(guān)注特定問題（例如，自行車交通、環(huán)境保護(hù)、停車方式、城市形象），針對(duì)感興趣的人群或特定的民間組織來進(jìn)行討論，并聽取了相關(guān)團(tuán)體的意見。我們的規(guī)劃過程不能被看作是一種參與式模式，因?yàn)樗哂袕?fù)雜的工程背景，并且需要利益相關(guān)方的共同參與，雖然這樣做會(huì)導(dǎo)致人們對(duì)統(tǒng)一的結(jié)論產(chǎn)生質(zhì)疑，但是這些論壇的反饋意見卻是研究中的重要信息。

我們?cè)噲D在研究完成階段整合各方面結(jié)論，并通過排列和組合的方式來檢測(cè)各個(gè)方面不同“層次”的關(guān)聯(lián)性。我們創(chuàng)建了問題地圖，這為基于研究的設(shè)計(jì)方法奠定了良好的基礎(chǔ)。整合系統(tǒng)的設(shè)計(jì)基于對(duì)各方面不同層次的優(yōu)先排序。然后，不僅在研究階段，在整個(gè)設(shè)計(jì)過程中均對(duì)交通、景觀設(shè)計(jì)、城市空間的使用進(jìn)行了系統(tǒng)的管理—該公共空間的結(jié)構(gòu)軸線就是在類比五線譜的過程中形成的。

2 肖普朗的風(fēng)景（細(xì)節(jié)）The view of Sopron (detail)

3 1964年的城堡街Castle District, 1964

4 城堡街的再生

2009年秋天，肖普朗市政廳宣布了一個(gè)名為“肖普朗—城堡街復(fù)興”的國(guó)際開放性街道建筑競(jìng)賽。Hetedik M?terem Kft聯(lián)手景觀設(shè)計(jì)師GEUM M?terem Kft最終贏得了這場(chǎng)競(jìng)賽②。在歷經(jīng)了許多年的設(shè)計(jì)之后，宏偉壯麗的公共空間更新改造一期設(shè)計(jì)終于在2015年問世，完成改造的區(qū)域面積大約為15 000m2。

城堡街的美源自其橫截面連續(xù)不斷的變化和在近0.5km長(zhǎng)的區(qū)域內(nèi)不斷改變的空間關(guān)系，這些特點(diǎn)都?xì)w功于城堡街的活力和包容。這種被稱為縱向活力性和橫向多樣性的二元關(guān)系，是我們希望在城堡街更新規(guī)劃中延續(xù)并加強(qiáng)的。規(guī)劃的主要概念是：讓人們站在城堡街的任何一個(gè)地方，都能感受到這是整個(gè)區(qū)域中重要的組成部分。然而，達(dá)成目的須使用相對(duì)溫和的設(shè)計(jì)手法，因?yàn)檠刂菈?nèi)外排布的建筑立面的歷史發(fā)展與各城市設(shè)計(jì)要素息息相關(guān)，因此，主導(dǎo)地位的爭(zhēng)奪完全沒有必要。

作為匈牙利最重要的風(fēng)景園林評(píng)論家之一，Sándor Bardóczi寫到：“有時(shí)，城鎮(zhèn)會(huì)在展示自身形象時(shí)遭遇困境，從而錯(cuò)失成為一個(gè)真正的天堂的機(jī)會(huì)。地方色彩是一種難以捉摸的物質(zhì)，即使我們每天都在城鎮(zhèn)中穿行，我們也不會(huì)總是注意到它是何時(shí)消失的。當(dāng)衰落（包括公共空間的衰落）逐漸開始時(shí)，強(qiáng)烈的外觀的重新演繹會(huì)產(chǎn)生一種突如其來的震撼效果，但這也可能會(huì)為公共空間的再利用打開新的視角。肖普朗城堡街的開放空間長(zhǎng)期處于一種被忽視的荒蕪狀態(tài)和缺少生氣的沉寂之中，這一切在現(xiàn)在回顧起來尤其明顯，特別是在城堡街已經(jīng)完成改造的區(qū)域和未經(jīng)改造的地區(qū)之間的分界處?；叵肫饋恚盍钊司趩实膽?yīng)該是第二次世界大戰(zhàn)和世紀(jì)之交之間的那段時(shí)期，當(dāng)時(shí)這些場(chǎng)所被有組織地用于交通運(yùn)輸和停車。如今，我們用一條以步行為主的長(zhǎng)廊代替了之前的功能，把城市生活、步行活動(dòng)、自行車交通、集會(huì)作為主要功能，并且減少了交通區(qū)、咖啡館和會(huì)議設(shè)施?！?/p>

在歷史環(huán)境和空間狀態(tài)基礎(chǔ)上，設(shè)計(jì)的主要目標(biāo)是創(chuàng)造一個(gè)外觀勻質(zhì)的坡地，并延展到城墻之外。首先是材料使用的新概念：為了確保空間結(jié)構(gòu)的一致性，我們因此選擇了深色的、莊重且自然的硬磚以及花崗巖。花崗巖條紋的形狀就像樂譜線一樣，能在不影響整體性的前提下，與公共建筑不同的功能特點(diǎn)相協(xié)調(diào)。在后來的工作中發(fā)現(xiàn)，我們工作室提出的這種形象化比喻對(duì)于推動(dòng)設(shè)計(jì)進(jìn)程十分有益。像這樣一個(gè)項(xiàng)目，在概念統(tǒng)一的設(shè)計(jì)過程中受到的威脅是許多充滿善意的關(guān)注，而不是施工工期的討論。當(dāng)我們談到這個(gè)不規(guī)則的、曾經(jīng)的護(hù)城河時(shí)，我們總是會(huì)回到競(jìng)賽的坐標(biāo)原點(diǎn)，所以我們的想法會(huì)變得與最初的概念非常相似，因此也就不會(huì)破壞項(xiàng)目的統(tǒng)一性。然而，維護(hù)交通、金融、自行車或機(jī)動(dòng)車泊車點(diǎn)的公民宣稱，公共設(shè)施的有機(jī)混合、城市政策以及不斷提出的功能性需求可能會(huì)對(duì)場(chǎng)地現(xiàn)狀造成強(qiáng)烈侵蝕，但是被延遲的設(shè)計(jì)進(jìn)程卻提升了設(shè)計(jì)的品質(zhì)（圖6）。

4 重建之前的城堡街，2009年The Castle District before the reconstruction, 2009

5 城堡街瑪利亞雕塑前景觀Castle District with the Maria-Statue in the foreground

在對(duì)交通系統(tǒng)和空間利用問題進(jìn)行探討和有效檢測(cè)之后，設(shè)計(jì)師決定采用“單車道”形式?，F(xiàn)有道路被保留了下來，但是對(duì)交通量進(jìn)行了限制，步行區(qū)、自行車道、城市綠化帶以及露臺(tái)都將被放置在這條大道上。寬闊的內(nèi)部步行區(qū)和外部交通線路的建立，及其規(guī)模的變化都使行人從中獲益。根據(jù)所提出的空間組織原則，整條城堡街將按照棋盤式街道空間進(jìn)行布局。該系統(tǒng)還可以應(yīng)對(duì)使用功能的多變性，即在確定的線性空間內(nèi)放置最適合的戶外設(shè)施（圖7）。

公共設(shè)施重建之后，依照新的交通系統(tǒng)重新安置了街道照明，并翻新了人行道。在考慮公共設(shè)施分布密度的同時(shí)，景觀和植被也得到了最大程度的關(guān)注。高聳的刺葉植物被種植于中心區(qū)，而樹冠較小的樹種則分布于建筑物周邊—一方面是為了確保歷史街區(qū)主立面的視野，另一方面則是為了滿足人行區(qū)域的不同功能需求（圖8）。

Barnabás Winkler在他的評(píng)價(jià)中如此形容更新后的公共空間：“來此的游客，特別是肖普朗的居民們，看起來都對(duì)重新煥發(fā)了活力的城區(qū)感到非常滿意。城堡街不再只扮演流動(dòng)空間的角色，在這里有真正的城市生活……曾經(jīng)消失不見的親切氛圍再次回到這個(gè)用現(xiàn)代材料重建但仍然具有小城鎮(zhèn)的舒適感的城堡街。……通過對(duì)交通系統(tǒng)的合理設(shè)置，公共交通的速度被有效放緩。綠地比例并未減少，事實(shí)上，它們可以作為遮蓋地面鋪裝的裝飾細(xì)節(jié)。”

更新后的城堡街恢復(fù)了原來的空間結(jié)構(gòu)，如果查看舊的明信片、繪畫和照片，你就會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)統(tǒng)一的公共空間并不僅僅只是古建筑轉(zhuǎn)譯的載體。公共空間的使用功能基于舊有模式：集市成為了餐飲區(qū)和城市活動(dòng)的集會(huì)場(chǎng)所。在長(zhǎng)達(dá)7年的公共空間更新設(shè)計(jì)過程中，許多民眾認(rèn)為由于交通的限制，主廣場(chǎng)可能會(huì)被棄置。無論如何，肖普朗的商業(yè)活動(dòng)、城市事件和市民生活在廣場(chǎng)再生之后都會(huì)占據(jù)這片區(qū)域。因此，我們?cè)O(shè)計(jì)了一種可以承載各種活動(dòng)的硬件設(shè)施。更新后的空間結(jié)構(gòu)不僅產(chǎn)生了一種具有21世紀(jì)標(biāo)志的充滿秩序且統(tǒng)一的場(chǎng)所環(huán)境，還產(chǎn)生了一種直接相關(guān)的結(jié)果：城市空間的使用幾乎迅速地轉(zhuǎn)移到了城市歷史中心的再利用上。

項(xiàng)目的最終目標(biāo)是創(chuàng)建一個(gè)連片且繁華的廣場(chǎng)，在那里，車行道僅作為交通目的使用，餐廳和商店的分布更多地受益于復(fù)興之前的格局。因此，市中心可以重新獲得經(jīng)濟(jì)效益和公眾支持，并成為肖普朗的地標(biāo)。

公共空間局部保留了城市的有機(jī)發(fā)展。城市歷史中心重建的責(zé)任在于重現(xiàn)這種空間記憶，它使日后的保護(hù)成為可能，當(dāng)然也為了迎合當(dāng)代的需求。肖普朗城堡街的振興是一項(xiàng)復(fù)雜的市政工程和城市規(guī)劃任務(wù)，需要非常嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)?shù)膱F(tuán)隊(duì)協(xié)作才能獲得與以往相統(tǒng)一的空間格局，并且保持和展現(xiàn)空間的一致性。在該項(xiàng)目中，不僅需要保護(hù)建筑物，而且作為項(xiàng)目和城市一部分的空間特性也應(yīng)該得到特別關(guān)注。除了將城市歷史中心的空間印記保留下來，并使后人能夠清晰地解讀場(chǎng)所空間之外，我們沒有做其他多余的設(shè)計(jì)（圖9）。

5 后續(xù)工程及影響

城堡街第一個(gè)也是最長(zhǎng)的工程階段已經(jīng)在2015年底結(jié)束，它也表明了該項(xiàng)目下一步的發(fā)展趨勢(shì)，即城市歷史中心區(qū)的周邊區(qū)域。市中心公共廣場(chǎng)的更新計(jì)劃也已經(jīng)開始實(shí)施，預(yù)計(jì)和另外2個(gè)大型且毗鄰的城市更新區(qū)域小城堡街（Kisvárkerület）和賽切尼廣場(chǎng)（Széchenyi tér）同時(shí)完工。其中，作為城市更新項(xiàng)目第二階段的小城堡街即將完成。雖然賽切尼廣場(chǎng)的空間布局要求有一個(gè)完全不同的概念，但使其保持與整個(gè)區(qū)域的統(tǒng)一性和一致性也是非常重要的（圖10）。

在肖普朗，賽切尼廣場(chǎng)是圍繞著市中心的一系列公共空間中最大的廣場(chǎng)，盡管它是城堡街不可分割的組成部分，但它仍然具有獨(dú)立性。塞切尼廣場(chǎng)兼具空間集合體與獨(dú)立點(diǎn)2個(gè)身份：就其在城市空間結(jié)構(gòu)中的位置來看，它是一個(gè)城市廣場(chǎng)，但從使用功能上來說，它又是一片綠地或者說是城市公園。幾個(gè)世紀(jì)以來，它一直按照社會(huì)、自然和文化條件不斷發(fā)展，但如今的空間格局只是以往的縮影。在思考賽切尼廣場(chǎng)的復(fù)興規(guī)劃時(shí)，我們?cè)O(shè)想了由道路和開闊空間交織而成的具有部分鋪裝的場(chǎng)地，最重要的是，這片場(chǎng)地中要有一片相當(dāng)大的綠色為公共廣場(chǎng)和公園提供某種形式的過渡，從而將這2種城市空間的功能和效益結(jié)合起來。沿著建筑立面分布，即塞尼切廣場(chǎng)一側(cè)的人行道得到了擴(kuò)展—作為城堡街的延長(zhǎng)部分—因此，該廣場(chǎng)將與城市結(jié)構(gòu)單元城堡街相連。出于內(nèi)部功能安排的考慮，細(xì)長(zhǎng)的廣場(chǎng)被橫向劃分。設(shè)計(jì)尊重2處現(xiàn)有古跡賽切尼廣場(chǎng)和“旗忠”雕塑（Flag of Loyalty）的主導(dǎo)地位，但也為它們創(chuàng)造了一個(gè)新的框架，即重建的軸對(duì)稱空間結(jié)構(gòu)。我們構(gòu)思規(guī)劃一個(gè)地毯式空間，即營(yíng)造一個(gè)抽象的、由專門的交通體系環(huán)繞的城市廣場(chǎng)。就城堡街已經(jīng)完成的工程項(xiàng)目而言，建筑空間的縱向組織結(jié)構(gòu)使人聯(lián)想起活頁樂譜，因?yàn)樗梢栽谶@個(gè)整齊劃一的城市網(wǎng)格中捕捉廣場(chǎng)的元素（綠地、鋪裝路面、長(zhǎng)凳、水面、紀(jì)念碑）。

接下來的幾個(gè)階段預(yù)計(jì)在近幾年完成，在此期間，這座具有空前美景的歷史悠久的城市廣場(chǎng)將以復(fù)雜的方式進(jìn)行更新。具有上百年歷史的城市將會(huì)創(chuàng)造它的21世紀(jì)形象，即成為由一系列公共空間片段統(tǒng)一組成的現(xiàn)代空間，并且能用特有的方式處理不同的場(chǎng)地問題。

首先，雖然這個(gè)項(xiàng)目最主要的階段已經(jīng)獲得了很多榮譽(yù)和獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)。但與建筑師、景觀師以及值得紀(jì)念的獎(jiǎng)杯相比，空間的使用者才是贏得這些成就的最大功臣：他們將活力帶回了城堡街。該城市的前首席設(shè)計(jì)師對(duì)第一階段的工作成果進(jìn)行了總結(jié)和評(píng)價(jià)：“列文特·薩博和他的同事們所做的規(guī)劃設(shè)計(jì)旨在告訴我們，設(shè)計(jì)者已經(jīng)意識(shí)到道路和廣場(chǎng)、移動(dòng)和到達(dá)同時(shí)存在是空間的主要問題。這種空間特征具體表現(xiàn)為：在移動(dòng)期間它會(huì)被人們學(xué)習(xí)和理解，而且移動(dòng)的過程會(huì)將體驗(yàn)和娛樂這2種抽象活動(dòng)聯(lián)系在一起，凱文·林奇（Kevin Lynch）稱之為移動(dòng)系統(tǒng)。沿途的視覺景觀和具有不同特征的空間片段展現(xiàn)了一個(gè)完整的空間演替序列。這種移動(dòng)和變化是為了在體驗(yàn)詩(shī)意空間序列的過程中形成一種基本體驗(yàn)，其中各種各樣的鋪裝路面和綠化帶交替出現(xiàn)—為露臺(tái)、水景以及休閑和娛樂活動(dòng)提供了空間，所有這些都是一個(gè)富有生機(jī)，充滿活力的城市廣場(chǎng)必不可少的要素。本文引用了音樂與場(chǎng)地之間的聯(lián)系。而且并非巧合的是，競(jìng)標(biāo)方案的技術(shù)描述，作為設(shè)計(jì)方案的基礎(chǔ)，早就考慮到這一特殊的創(chuàng)作原則，并對(duì)照音樂記譜法將帶狀的場(chǎng)地空間分解為一張樂譜。城市空間結(jié)構(gòu)中出現(xiàn)的元素譜成了樂符，綠地和帶狀鋪裝則是交替出現(xiàn)的音樂主題。……我們還應(yīng)該聯(lián)想到建筑的結(jié)構(gòu)方式—嚴(yán)格的自律，它為我們展示了景觀空間的決定性因素，而這些人們已經(jīng)達(dá)成基本共識(shí)。不時(shí)出現(xiàn)的城墻，將幾個(gè)世紀(jì)以來出現(xiàn)的建筑立面整合到了這條由墻體圍合而成的空間帶中，從遠(yuǎn)處看，它與塔樓形成交相輝映的景觀。令人耳目一新的設(shè)計(jì)概念并沒有與一系列的歷史建筑相沖突，而是全方位地提升了它們的空間體驗(yàn)和享受。顯然，這才是這項(xiàng)設(shè)計(jì)的主要目標(biāo)。憑借著色彩和空間結(jié)構(gòu)，新的建筑形象將會(huì)成為肖普朗歷史城區(qū)中立、沒有過多傾向性的背景。[10]”

總之，我們可以這樣說，已完成的肖普朗城堡街公共廣場(chǎng)復(fù)興項(xiàng)目產(chǎn)生了可從建筑實(shí)踐角度驗(yàn)證的結(jié)果，即它不僅為肖普朗的城市空間帶來可見和公認(rèn)的動(dòng)力，同時(shí)也改變了空間的基本使用功能，使該區(qū)域恢復(fù)了生機(jī)與活力。在長(zhǎng)期的工程項(xiàng)目實(shí)踐過程中，實(shí)現(xiàn)跨學(xué)科建筑研究和設(shè)計(jì)的緊密結(jié)合，具有重要的意義和模型價(jià)值。這種以研究為基礎(chǔ)的設(shè)計(jì)，其綜合性質(zhì)不僅影響了研究的方法論，而且也體現(xiàn)在研究成果之中。占據(jù)歷史城市中心區(qū)近一半面積的公共廣場(chǎng)更新項(xiàng)目，從整體到細(xì)部保持了統(tǒng)一性，作為一個(gè)開放系統(tǒng)它具有很強(qiáng)的包容性：適應(yīng)歷史、形態(tài)構(gòu)成、復(fù)雜而動(dòng)態(tài)的空間使用模式，以及建筑與公共空間的整合[11-13]（圖11）。

注釋(Notes)：

① 迄今為止，該項(xiàng)目中規(guī)模最大、最引人注目的部分已經(jīng)完成并獲得了多項(xiàng)匈牙利國(guó)內(nèi)以及國(guó)際獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)。2016年，作為入圍著名的歐洲密斯·凡·德羅獎(jiǎng)的匈牙利項(xiàng)目之一，它獲得了pro建筑獎(jiǎng)（the Pro Architectura Prize）的優(yōu)秀建筑作品以及國(guó)際古跡遺址理事會(huì)獎(jiǎng)（the ICOMOS Award）頒布的“歷史建筑最佳重建獎(jiǎng)”，并于同年榮獲塞爾維亞第20屆建筑沙龍的DaNS城市設(shè)計(jì)沙龍獎(jiǎng)。該項(xiàng)目已經(jīng)在匈牙利和國(guó)外的幾個(gè)展覽中展出。

The largest and most spectacular element of the project,which has been realized so far, has received many Hungarian and international prizes. In 2016, it was one of the Hungarian nominees of the prestigious European Mies van der Rohe Prize, received the Pro Architectura Prize for outstanding architectural works as well as the ICOMOS Award for the best reconstructions of historic buildings,and in the same year it was awarded the Salon Award in urban design category at DaNS 20th Salon of Architecture,Serbia. The project was presented at several Hungarian and foreign exhibitions.

②總設(shè)計(jì)師：Hetedik M?terem Kft.；主建筑師： Levente Szabó；景觀設(shè)計(jì)師：Csenge Csontos，Borbála Gyüre，Gergely Lád；合作建筑師：Balázs Biri，Jessica Dvorzsák，Dávid Kohout，Orsolya Simon。

General designer: Hetedik M?terem Kft., architect in charge: Levente Szabó, landscape design: Csenge Csontos, Borbála Gyüre, Gergely Lád, co-architects: Balázs Biri, Jessica Dvorzsák, Dávid Kohout, Orsolya Simon

③ 圖1來源于檔案照片；圖2由邁克爾·扎卡賴亞斯繪制，1700年，肖普朗圖書館館藏作品，編號(hào)Kp.54.510.1；圖 3 由 Lechner Nonprofit Kft. Dokumentációs K?zpont / VáTI?Fortepan提供；圖4、10由courtesy of Hetedik M?terem提 供； 圖 5由 Balázs Danyi拍 攝，2016年； 圖 6～9 由Balázs Danyi拍攝，2016年；圖11由 Donát Rohonczi繪制，2017年。

Fig. 1 ? archive photo; Fig. 2 ? Michael Zacharias, 1700,Sopron Museum, Kp.54.510.1; Fig. 3 Image courtesy of Lechner Nonprofit Kft. Dokumentációs K?zpont / VáTI?Fortepan; Fig. 4, 10 ? courtesy of Hetedik M?terem；Fig. 5 ? Balázs Danyi, 2016; Fig. 6～9 ? Balázs Danyi,2016; Fig. 11 ? Donát Rohonczi, 2017.

6 城堡街?jǐn)U建區(qū)域The widening part of the Castle District

1 The Analogy: Public Squares as Fossils of the Past

Today’s road network, settlement structure,and the larger, contiguous units as well as certain specific parts of European historical towns have often been determined by natural or artificial formations that had already existed centuries or millennia before. The cities’ slow, organic development has preserved, transformed, and used as heritage anything that could be used from these formations either in whole or in part,which features were functional, or the demolition or conversion of which would have cost too much. Today, in the first half of the 21stcentury,intervening in such a dense and multilayer urban tissue makes the factors tangible—both in the intellectual and physical sense of the word—also for the designer, which factors are more important than current considerations and interests, for example the heritage of these districts of a town.

Among the European cities (but not exclusively in cases observable on this continent), many examples can be found for this slow, organic development and metamorphosis. At the beginning of the study,I would like to introduce one of the most wellknown examples, the breathtaking Piazza Navona in the historic center of Rome, Italy[1]. At this place,which is well-known from the tourist guides and densely built up with unique monuments, the buildings and fountains—individual creations of the greatest creators—are seen in close coexistence.Still, what could be experienced on the spot and personally, when I was there, I was excited about it the most was the origin of the spatial form. The former 15,000-seat stadium of Domitian (Titus Flavius Domitianus) Roman emperor, opened in 86,once stood at the site of Navona, the spatial imprint and memories of which define the structure, sense of space and atmosphere even today, almost two thousand years later (Fig. 1). The 270m long and 55m wide former arena is today a bustling public plaza crowded with tourists. There were once shops and workshops in the boundary walls of the square—between the ruins of Domitian’s stadium—now it is surrounded by churches and palaces. Thus, its form and shape today is determined by the vanished place of a nearly two thousand years old facility and work of art. Although the successive ages had constantly shaped the square, new houses and great fountains were built, but the spatial form remained unchanged.Today the former arena of the stadium, later the venue of equestrian competitions, carnivals and water circuses, then markets and fairs, is a prominent tourist destination, one of Rome’s most important historic sites. Of course, the history of a place is not only about its shape and form: also the church of Sant’ Agnese in Agone by Borromini has its own story, commemorating Saint Agnes who died of martyrdom in the Domitian stadium during the persecution of Christians. Two thousand years: the building stock has been constantly evolving and changing, the usage has also changed, yet the origin, the former character, history and tradition of the space are easy to read even today. Of course, there are many historical sites similar to Piazza Navona, where the organic, spontaneous development of the city has overgrown and this way preserved the spatiality of this evolution and story.In these examples, remembrance and memories are not related to a particular architectural work, neither to their multitude but to the spatial memory of an urban, city-scale development and slow transformation which is a collective creation, as is usually the historical city itself.

We envisaged this fantastic historical public plaza (and of course many others) when we worked on the plans and assisted the implementation of one of the most significant historical public spaces in Sopron, Western Hungary.This historical analogy, however, primarily set a direction for the idea of renovation. The concrete steps were preceded by a kind of interdisciplinary research involving architects, landscape designers, transport and utility engineers; and our design principles, then the entire design process itself could directly rely on the findings of this research (Fig. 2)①.

7 城堡街豐富的橫斷面Cross-sectional diversity of the Castle District

2 A Typical Historical Town in Western Hungary: Sopron,and the Castle District

The town of Sopron is a settlement richest in monuments in Hungary,standing on the Austrian-Hungarian border. It was already inhabited in prehistoric times, known as Scarbantia, an important town during the Roman Empire, but it has always been a privileged settlement of the region throughout history[2]. To this day, the historical city core is determined by the town wall which was erected in the 13thcentury on foundations originated from the ancient Roman Empire era. On the basis of the peace treaty ending World War I, the status of the city was decided by a local plebiscite, voting for belonging to Hungary instead of the neighboring Austria. The memory of this decision is preserved also in the city’s standing locution: “The Most Loyal Town”(civitas fidelissima). The shape of the historic town center, reminiscent of the onionskin’s structure, still dominates the city’s central road network, the land divisions, and the streets’ proportion and atmosphere. In- and outside the city walls, there are two essentially different worlds[3]. While medieval buildings,narrow, winding streets and residential homes dominate the zone inside the town wall, the ground floor zone along the two sides of the wide and broad public place—today called the Castle District and developed by filling the former moat along the town wall—has always been filled with service functions (Fig. 3).

The Castle District of Sopron is a 40～60 meter wide boulevard, which was formed on the outer skirt of the moat running along the city walls that encircled the former historical core of the town, on the so called glacis slope[4].The boulevard today known the Castle District includes the largest part of the castle belt zone; its rows of houses, however, are different in their history.The outer row of houses, which is farther away from the former town wall,was already there in the Middle Ages, the first mention of it is from 1400. The inner side is mentioned much later in historiography. According to the Payr Chronicle, there were fair booths along the castle moat already at the beginning of the 17thcentury. After the Great Fire of 1676, their number grew, and the town earned a lot of income from the wages of land[5]. Town-owned plots were gradually bought and extended by the booth owners, and in addition to the wooden constructions, they have placed permanent stone constructions too. Warehouses were built in the former moats, some stores merged, and residential houses were built with shops on the ground floor, typical of the Castle District up to the present day. The moat lost its defense role after the siege of the Kuruc and was later filled up, and from that time its environment began to become the place for commerce. In 1776, only the inner row of houses were called Grabenrunde, this name started to be commonly used for the whole of today’s Castle District only from 1869[6]. The transformation of the Castle District facades became very intense by the end of the 18thcentury,resulting in the high number of Rococo and Louis XVI style buildings (most of them were ruined in 1944–1945, during World War II). Finally, during the 19thcentury, many such small houses were converted with Romantic decorations. From 1900 to 1923, the tramline network of Sopron (as part of the metre-gauge electrified public transport network in Hungary) crossed the district,with no trace in the city today, but postcards of the time bear witness to this progressive level of development of the transport infrastructure. Between 1941 and 1944, the former cobbled Castle District was transformed into a three-lane structure between Ikvahíd utca and árpád utca (with the traffic lane in the middle and service roads on the two sides). After 1945, the houses were re-numbered,in 1949 the street’s name was changed to Lenin k?rút, which was in use until 31 October 1989, the end of the Soviet invasion, when it got back its original name.

As the Piazza Navona preserved the formation imprint of the former Domitian stadium in Rome, in this case the town walls make observable the moat system’s spatiality and its elimination and incorporation in Sopron’s urban fabric these days.As we would examine a fossil: the city overgrown the former defense object. The created spatial formation is a beautiful example of organic urban development.

Conditions, prevailing before the start of design process of the Castle District’s renewal,had developed during the second half of the 20thcentury. At that time, a traffic system was developed on basis of Pál Boronkai's plans with retain walls,articulated and separated traffic routes (service road). This traffic-dominated state restricted pedestrian traffic to the minimum and at the same time it separated the once contiguous space longitudinally. Traffic light intersections, service roads, cars passing and searching for parking place restricted pedestrian traffic to a narrow stripe along the walls. The engineer-constructed system was fitted to the conditions developed after World War II, when the main road from Gy?r led through the Castle District to Vienna. Prior to the conversion, actually the whole Castle District was one contiguous parking lot[7]. The generosity of the extremely wide public place, the large and contiguous square worthy of a city was overbuilt and over-articulated: the area was filled with retaining walls, roads and hedges blocking the view.On the ground floors of the Castle District houses,the traditional functional dominance of hospitality and trade was not accompanied by corresponding public space connections (e.g. coffee terraces,outdoor catering areas). The architectural elements(historic buildings) of the public piazza were in poor aesthetic and technical condition, and the area missed a single, integrated image that could have given identity to the Castle District. The place between the statue of Virgin Mary and the Fountain of Loyalty is one of the most important public spaces in Sopron. Nevertheless, it was unjustly fragmented and divided by retaining walls and stairs(Fig.4, 5).

8 城堡街垂直鳥瞰圖Vertical aerial view of the Castle District

3 Background, Process and Methods of the Interdisciplinary Research

Although preliminary research on location (its history, topography and morphology), he function,sociological environment etc. is an indispensable part of any architectural design process, this is especially true when the base of the design is an urban tissue rich and complex in terms of its historical layers. During the long preparation and planning process of the Sopron Castle District,all these considerations were complemented by engineering aspects, which formed the research process into one with an interdisciplinary character.

It is important to emphasize in advance that this research process cannot be considered as basic but as applied research, in which the aspects and results of the research were directly linked and embedded in the sketching of design alternatives and also in the design decisions. We can talk about a true research-based design when looking back at the whole process, during which the final planning decisions could rely on and be formed by the questions and results of the research, and the complex public space revitalization itself was realized this way.

The background of our study was based on the available preliminary studies on the morphology,structure and history of the town. These background materials, as well as the Integrated Urban Development Strategies formulating comprehensive concepts for the city as a whole,meant such abstract knowledge base the processing of which was our primary task already at the design phase. In addition, neither the on-site analysis can be overestimated. With my colleagues, during several visits and examination of the design area and its direct neighborhood, after the abstraction of preliminary materials, with a method based on very tangible, eye-level observations we have prepared the chart bases, which attempted to summarize the main problems and potentials of the site. The general method of SWOT analysis also helped us here: as a starting point we summarized the matrix of strengths-weaknesses- potentials-risks. Prior to our intervention, the serious problems of the site were formulated on basis of the SWOT analysis as follows[8-9]:

—Traffic overload cut off the outer and inner arch of the Castle District, while the utilization of the wide public space was extremely bad.

—Besides the narrow streets of the picturesque city center, there were no public spaces that would provide open and clear areas which could be used as urban spaces.

—There was little green area.

—There was a lack of multi-faceted and articulated urban space qualities that would have filled the Castle District with an intensive urban life.Just like long ago the fairs, there are still functions that are able to turn the square to an event space.

—The functional structure on the ground floor of the buildings along the two rows of facades was overly inhomogeneous, since the unfavorable public place—essentially limited to two sidewalks—did not encourage ownership and function changes in direction of urban services(typically to catering industry).

And at the start, the great potentials of the location were found in these factors:

—The Castle District carried the promise of a contiguous urban space, about which we could clearly demonstrate that it would greatly contribute to the expansion of the urban spatial spectrum of the city.

—The Castle District was characterized by exciting and insufficiently exploited environmental connections.

—The features of the area (width and length dimensions) made it possible to form more coherent green areas, mainly in the form of an intense tree planting.

—A well-developed concept carried the hope of becoming a determinant identity-forming element of Sopron.

—By creating a good layout concept, the beauty of the facades on the two sides, as well as their architectural and cityscape value promised the appreciation of the place.

The process and methodology of further research was supported by approaches to different disciplines. On one hand, we worked on the architecture historical research of the historical spatial structure, in which we analyzed the development of the Castle District as a public space, the spatial relations of the Castle District, the space usage of each periods, and their dynamics. The traffic engineer members of our team performed traffic counts in the design area and its immediate vicinity, in order to record not only the pre-planning state, but also to gain basic information on the conditions after the public place renewal. Minimizing the transit traffic of our design area, that is, the Castle District, which is the widest section of the boulevard around the historic city core, and displacing a significant part of traffic from this area was possible with a kind of bypass intervention. In the meantime, until the road network bypassing the city center is finished, it was necessary to convert the boulevard section around the other side of the direct city core to a two-way road and also to make it attractive for transit traffic. However, this intervention had to be preceded by very thorough traffic modeling, during which we became convinced and could persuade also the decision-makers in that respect that the significant traffic engineering intervention, i.e. the reorganization of traffic within the city, would benefit the design areas without causing any damage or disadvantage outside of them.

There is a fundamental methodical tension between the ‘site plan’ level, two-dimensional study and design of this type of city-scale plans and the grasping of reality that is perceptible at eye level.For this reason, and partly in order to present a sufficiently perceptible visualization material that can be communicated to decision-makers or at various forums, we have taken photos from viewpoints approx. 8～10 m above the pedestrian level that could combine the benefits of top views and eye views due to their special viewpoint height. However, these images have proved to be indispensable not only for the presentations but also for our site analyzes.

During the planning process, we participated on a number of occasions in forums and discussions being well-known from the participative design methods, where we discussed our plans in general for the interested or for specific civil organizations by focusing on a specific issue (e.g.bicycle traffic, environmental protection, parking versions, city image) and listened to the comments of these groups. Our planning process cannot be regarded as one following a participatory model since it had a complex engineering background and would require the involvement of so many interest groups that would have made the unified outcome questionable, however, feedbacks from these forums were important research inputs.

We tried to integrate all these aspects already at the end of the research phase and to examine the different ‘layers’ of each aspect by interlinking and combining them. We created problem maps that made a good basis for the research based design methodology. We can talk about system design, which sought to integrate all emerging aspects, of course by prioritizing them. Then, the traffic, landscape design and urban space usage considerations were managed at a system level not only in the research phase but also during design—this is how the power lines of this public space architecture were created for the analogy of music scores.

4 Renewal of the Castle District

In autumn 2009, the city council of Sopron announced a national, secret, open architectural competition with the title “Sopron—Revitalization of the Castle District”. The competition was won by Hetedik M?terem Kft. in collaboration with its landscape designer partner GEUM M?terem Kft②. In the course of several years of design work, the first and most spectacular phase of the public space renewal, an approx. 15,000 m2large area has been completed by 2015.

The beauty of the Castle District lies in its character created by the continuously changing cross sections and constantly varying spatial relations along almost half a kilometer length; and by the feature that all this belongs to Várk?rút (Castle Boulevard), to its dynamism and generosity. This duality, namely the dichotomy of the longitudinal dynamism and the cross-sectional diversity is the greatest value that we wanted to strengthen in our plan. The key concept was that when standing at any point of the Castle District everyone should know and feel that he/she is in this very part of the area. However, moderate approach was also required since the fa?ades of the historic development along the inner and outer curves are determinative urban design elements, thus competing with them for dominance is absolutely unnecessary.

9 肖普朗及其城堡街鳥瞰圖Sopron and the Castle District from a bird’s-eye view

As one of the most important Hungarian landscape-architecture-critic, Sándor Bardóczi wrote: “Sometimes a town has trouble with articulating what it is missing to be a truly good place. Couleur locale is an elusive substance, and even as we move through it day to day we won't always notice when it is finally gone. When decline(including that of public spaces) sets in gradually,a drastic extrinsic reinterpretation can produce an abrupt shocking effect, but one that may open up new perspectives for an inspired reuse of public space. The open spaces of Sopron’s castle district had long been in a neglected state of barren and unimaginative dreariness, all the more apparent now in hindsight, especially on the dividing line of the developed and undeveloped sections of the castle grounds. In retrospect the most dismal period would have been that between World War II and the turn of the millennia, when these premises were gradually and systematically given over to transportation and parking purposes. In place of that, we now have a considerable tract of pedestriandominated promenade space, giving way to urban life, perambulation, cycle traffic, meeting points,reduced traffic zones, cafés and event facilities.”

Focusing on the historical environment and the former state, our main aim was to create a space of uniform appearance with a natural slope towards the outer arch. Primarily the use of materials unifies the new concept: therefore we chose dark-colored, noble and natural-looking clinker brick and granite stripes for ensuring the uniformity of the spatial structure. The graphics of the latter, like lines in sheet music, were meant to arrange the different features of public building functions without disturbing the sense of integrity.Our studio drew up this formal analogy and as it turned out later it was a great help in the further design process. Such a work like in this one, the unity of the concept is threatened by so many well-meaning interests during the design process not to talk about the construction period. As we negotiated about this amorphous, onetime moat,we always returned to the competition’s coordinate system so the realization of our thoughts became really similar to the first thoughts, the unity of the project was not damaged. However, the traffic, financial, cyclist or parking plot protecting civil claims, the utilities’ organic mishmash, the urban policy and the constantly arising functional considerations could have made really strong erosion, but the delayed design process further enhanced (Fig. 6).

After problem-exploration and valid monitoring of the traffic system and use of place, the designers decided on a “one-side channel” structure. The existing road was kept, but with an appreciably limited traffic, and the pedestrian zone, bicycle roads, green belt and terraces will be adjusted to this lane. There a wide internal pedestrian zone and an external traffic track is established; and the scale of these changes are in the favor of passers-by. The whole Castle District is unitized with a grid according to the proposed spatial organization precept. This system can also handle the planned diversity that within the determined location of the stripes the most suitable outdoor items are placed (Fig. 7).

10 市中心總平面圖Site plan of the entire town center

After the complete reconstruction of utilities,new street lighting was installed and new pedestriandominated surfaces were formed in accordance with the renewed traffic system. Due to the public utility network’s density, landscaping and planting demanded great care. While high trees with pierced foliage were designed to the central zone, tree species with smaller canopy were placed next to the buildings—partly in order to ensure a dominant view for the historic fa?ades, and on the other hand because of the different functional requirements of the pedestrian-dominated areas (Fig. 8).

With regard to the renewed public space,Barnabás Winkler wrote in his review: “Visitors to the city, but especially the residents of Sopron seem to be happy with the revitalized urban district. The Castle District is no longer merely a circulation zone, but it is filled with real urban life …The once intimate atmosphere of the Castle District has returned, being reformulated with modern materials, but preserving the small-town coziness. … By rationalizing the traffic system here,the public road has pleasantly slowed down. The proportion of green areas has not decreased, they actually and perceivably counteract fine tracery of paved surfaces from all sides.”

The renewed Castle District regained its old structure and if you check on the old postcards,paintings and photos you can see that the unified public space has not just become an architectural transcript of the old one. The use of the public space is based on the old pattern: the market place became the catering zone and the venue for the city events. During the public space renewal’s 7-year-long design process, many people thought that the main square would be abandoned because of the traffic restriction. However, the shops, events and citizens of Sopron overrun right after the handover. So we created a hardware which can run a variety of software. The renewed spatial structure not just led to an ordered situation and a unified, 21stcentury corporate identity but to an even more relevant result: the use of the urban space shifted almost promptly towards the reuse of the historical city center.

The long-term goal is to create a connected,bustling plaza, whereat vehicular traffic is present only as destination traffic, where the distribution of restaurants and shops is more fortunate as it was before this rehabilitation, so Downtown could get trade and communal accent again, and could become the representative site of Sopron.

Public spaces preserve the organic development of part of the cities. The responsibility in the reconstruction was to recognize this kind of spatial memory, to be able to preserve it for the future and of course to meet the contemporary requirements.The revitalization of the Castle District in Sopron was a complex engineering and urban planning task which required a serious coordinating work to gain the former unity, to preserve and express the spatial homogeneity. In this case not only the architectural work need to be protected but as a part of a whole,a part of the city especially its spatial character should be concerned. We didn’t do anything else just preserved imprints and made them readable for the posterity (Fig. 9).

5 Further Phases and the Impact of the Project

The first and largest phase of the Castle District has been completed at the end of 2015,and now it indicates the direction for further developments of the areas surrounding the city core. The already started public plaza revitalization of the city center will be finished with the renewal of two large connected areas, Kisvárkerület (Small Castle District) and Széchenyi tér. Kisvárkerület belongs to the 2ndphase of the revitalization and will be a sequence of the completed project,while the spatial arrangement of Széchenyi tér will require a different concept, but it’s also really important to keep the uniformity and homogeneity of the whole area (Fig. 10).

In Sopron the square of Széchenyi tér is the largest element of the row of spaces embracing the downtown, and although it is an integral part of the Castle District, it still has an independent character. It is a collecting and starting point at the same time; and in terms of its position within the urban structure it is an urban square, although regarding the usage it is rather a green area or a park. During the centuries it has been constantly developing in accordance with social, natural and cultural conditions, but in this current state it is only a shadow of the former self. When thinking about the revitalized Széchenyi tér we imagine a partly paved area interwoven by roads and wider spaces, which is, above all, a green area of significant size providing some kind of transition between the public plaza and the park, and mixing the elements and benefits of these two urban qualities. The pedestrian zones, located along the fa?ades that define Széchenyi tér, are widened as the continuation of the Castle District, thus the square will be connected to the urban structural unit of the Castle District. The elongated shape of the square is divided by the transverse division of the inner arrangement. The design respects the dominance of the two existing memorials(Széchenyi tér and Flag of Loyalty), however, it creates a new frame for them with the renewed,axially symmetrical spatial structure. Our plan formulates a carpet-like space, creating an abstract urban square embraced by the obligate traffic system. In the case of the Castle District’s realized project, the architectural tool was a longitudinal space-organizing structure reminiscent of the sheet music’s scores; while here it is an urban raster that can capture the square’s elements (green and paved surfaces, benches, water surfaces, memorials) in a uniform system.

11 賽切尼廣場(chǎng)垂直視角平面圖Vertical aerial visualization of Széchenyi square

The next phases are expected to be realized in the near years, during which this historic downtown plaza with unparalleled beauty will be renewed in a complex way. It will create the 21stcentury image of this centuries old settlement as a modern row of spaces consisting of unified public space sections that handle the different spaces in their own way.

The first, although the greatest, phase of our work has received many awards and prizes. Beside the architect, landscape architect and monumental prizes, the achievements are justified the most by the users of the space: the life has returned to the Castle District. As the former chief-architect of the city summarized and evaluated our work of the 1stphase: “Levente Szabó and his colleagues made a plan telling that its creators have realized that the dominant problem of space was the simultaneous presence of road and square, movement and arrival. The specific feature of space is that it can be learned and understood during movement, and the process of movement connects its phenomena providing experience and entertainment (Kevin Lynch called it a moving system). Its views and space sections of different character give a full experience in the order of succession. This motion and drifting is made to become a basic experience by the poetic spatial order of the starting and then hanging, alternating paved and green strips of various qualities—giving space to terraces, water,and spaces of relaxation and play, all of which are indispensable elements of a lively, exciting urban plaza. The composition cites musical associations. It is no coincidence that the technical description of the competition entry, giving the basis for the work, has already referred to this particular compositional principle and compared the concentric flow of starting then breaking strips to a sheet music. It has referred to the elements appearing in the spatial structure as scores and the green and paved stripes as alternating music motifs.(...) We should also mention the architectural approach which—with serious self-discipline—shows the fundamental recognition that the decisive elements of the spectacles are already given. These are the castle wall appearing time to time, the fa?ades of buildings integrated into the band of the space wall over centuries, and the sight of towers intersecting and breaking the view from a distance. The fresh design does not compete with the row of long-standing buildings, but it promotes their full enjoyment. Apparently, the design considers this to be its main goal. With its color and structure,the new architectural image wants to be a neutral background for the historical downtown of Sopron.[10]”

In summary, it can be said that the realized public square revival of the Sopron Castle District has led to a result verifiable from the architectural practice’s point of view, not only because it has brought a visible and acknowledged momentum to this part of the city of Sopron, but also because a fundamental functional change of space utilization has begun: this urban area became filled with life.It is of great significance and model value also for the fact that during the long-term projects we could achieve a close unity of interdisciplinary architectural research and design. This comprehensive nature of research-based design has not only influenced the methodology of the research, but has also appeared in the result itself. The public square renewal project covering nearly half of the historic city center could stay unified even at the detail level, and as an open system it is able to accommodate many different aspects: adaptation to the historical, morphological formula, complex and ever-changing patterns of space usage or the set of public place architecture elements as a whole[11-13](Fig. 11).