可持續(xù)發(fā)展的奧運(yùn)會(huì)？都靈2006年冬奧會(huì)的背景和遺產(chǎn)

古斯塔沃·安布羅尼西，莫羅·貝爾塔，米凱利·博尼諾/Gustavo Ambrosini, Mauro Berta, Michele Bonino

王欣欣 譯/Translated by WANG Xinxin

可持續(xù)發(fā)展的奧運(yùn)會(huì)？都靈2006年冬奧會(huì)的背景和遺產(chǎn)

Sustainable Olympics? Background and Legacy of the Torino 2006 Winter Olympic Games

古斯塔沃·安布羅尼西，莫羅·貝爾塔，米凱利·博尼諾/Gustavo Ambrosini, Mauro Berta, Michele Bonino

王欣欣 譯/Translated by WANG Xinxin

1 “高山都市”的背景

無論是成為2006年冬季奧林匹克運(yùn)動(dòng)會(huì)的候選城市，還是之后作為主辦城市，對(duì)都靈來說都是無以倫比的體驗(yàn)。聯(lián)系到這座城市的歷史背景，以及自1990年代早期開始的城市整體規(guī)劃所帶來的城市框架的巨大轉(zhuǎn)變，這些經(jīng)歷與當(dāng)?shù)爻鞘姓叩年P(guān)聯(lián)能夠得到更完整的理解。

自1998年申辦初期，都靈作為候選城市，其最重要的特色應(yīng)該就是它長久以來與山地的關(guān)系，包括獨(dú)特的地理因素和歷史原因兩個(gè)方面。作為橫跨西阿爾卑斯山脈兩端的古老薩伏依公國的故都，都靈保持了城市結(jié)構(gòu)形態(tài)與周邊山脈的密切關(guān)系，它所在的大都市平原被周邊山脈包圍。從市中心望去，山頂?shù)木跋笄逦梢?。因此，山脈不單單是離這座城市很“近”，而是某種程度上就在城市之“中”，是都市空間必不可少的一部分。山景成了諸多街道和林蔭大道的背景，其中有一些甚至是從市中心內(nèi)部即可見的地標(biāo)。許多當(dāng)?shù)氐幕顒?dòng)和機(jī)構(gòu)都圍繞著阿爾卑斯山脈展開，比如，建于1874年的國家山地博物館，就是這座城市長久以來的“高山使命”的例證，當(dāng)然更有力的證據(jù)是早在1863年成立于都靈的意大利登山俱樂部（Alpine Club of Italy，簡稱CAI）。

都靈2006冬奧會(huì)（圖1）并非賦予了這片土地一個(gè)嶄新的旅游產(chǎn)業(yè)，而是為這座城市提供了一次在全球范圍內(nèi)提升“高山都市”形象的機(jī)會(huì)。都靈通過改善位于山地和城市之間的已有體育休閑設(shè)施網(wǎng)絡(luò)將其變?yōu)楝F(xiàn)實(shí)。

2 處于大城市視野中的奧運(yùn)場所

從一開始，奧林匹克工程的整體區(qū)域性策略就十分明確，它由兩個(gè)對(duì)立的選項(xiàng)組成，可大體劃分為位于山區(qū)的“雪上”項(xiàng)目和位于市區(qū)的“冰上”項(xiàng)目。因而最“重”的新建筑，也是占據(jù)了更多資金的工程，都集中于市區(qū)。位于山區(qū)的主要投資和建設(shè)早在1997年的高山滑雪世界錦標(biāo)賽之際就已完成，因此對(duì)于山區(qū)，策略的關(guān)鍵在于提升和改進(jìn)已有設(shè)施，這其中包括了冬奧會(huì)中用于跳臺(tái)滑雪項(xiàng)目的普拉格拉托體育場和塞薩納—帕里奧體育場的有舵雪橇軌道。

第一輪競選提案中，位于城市北部的康帝納薩區(qū)被指定為市區(qū)競賽場所的核心，考慮到它靠近高速公路和便捷抵達(dá)當(dāng)?shù)貦C(jī)場的地理位置，并且距離最初被指定為主要慶典舉辦場所的德爾·阿爾卑體育館（現(xiàn)在的尤文圖斯體育館）很近。只是后來，計(jì)劃徹底改變，都靈奧組委決定將城市焦點(diǎn)從北部邊界移動(dòng)到“靈格托軸”。這其實(shí)是都市規(guī)劃中一條新的“中央脊柱”的一部分，最終的整體規(guī)劃對(duì)此作了定義。新提案中，位于市區(qū)的奧林匹克場館的地理位置全部重新規(guī)劃，相比之前遠(yuǎn)離現(xiàn)實(shí)城市動(dòng)態(tài)而獨(dú)立的新建場館組團(tuán)的構(gòu)思，改成將競賽、訓(xùn)練、住宿和服務(wù)設(shè)施集為一體的緊湊型設(shè)計(jì)，分布于城市中主要的轉(zhuǎn)型地區(qū)，與周邊社區(qū)相聯(lián)系。因此，奧林匹克大家庭城市生活的新焦點(diǎn)變成了軍事廣場附近廣闊的綠色區(qū)域，前市級(jí)體育館成為新的慶典場所，面對(duì)奧運(yùn)火炬塔。

這個(gè)轉(zhuǎn)變可能是奧林匹克工程總體規(guī)劃中最顯著的方面。鑒于它與更大的城市視野之間的密切關(guān)系，而城市轉(zhuǎn)型實(shí)現(xiàn)在即，這個(gè)轉(zhuǎn)變可以被看作整個(gè)項(xiàng)目運(yùn)行可持續(xù)發(fā)展的一個(gè)重要因素。

盡管整體框架看起來具有連續(xù)性，單個(gè)項(xiàng)目在運(yùn)行效果上仍然存在差異。嘗試?yán)斫忭?xiàng)目之間的共同特性就顯得饒有趣味。

3 場館建筑：形態(tài)學(xué)分類的嘗試

奧林匹克場館和設(shè)施通常是依據(jù)不同元素來分類的，例如：功能、規(guī)模等?；诰唧w的城市設(shè)計(jì)問題，在這里我們?cè)O(shè)想一個(gè)不同的視角：設(shè)計(jì)的關(guān)注點(diǎn)在于新設(shè)施與其所處環(huán)境之間的關(guān)系。

3.1 改善城市結(jié)構(gòu)的新公共空間

對(duì)始建于1930年代運(yùn)動(dòng)場館組團(tuán)的翻新是尤為突出的案例，這里主要指前市級(jí)體育館和新奧林匹克冰球競技場（圖2）。成功的關(guān)鍵在于對(duì)廣闊的開放公共空間進(jìn)行重新利用，將周邊街道的一部分轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)橐粋€(gè)大型步行區(qū)域，以及重新設(shè)計(jì)軍事廣場的大面積綠化區(qū)。這兩座大型建筑在公園大草坪的兩側(cè)相傍而立，為中間的高密度區(qū)域提供了新的公共空間。奧林匹克（冰球）競技場配備了可移動(dòng)立柱和地板，為內(nèi)部空間分布和功能的改變提供了可能性，適用于不同用途，例如，冰上運(yùn)動(dòng)、室內(nèi)運(yùn)動(dòng)、音樂會(huì)、演出和展覽。另一方面，新建的游泳中心使得設(shè)施的全面性得以完善，盡管步行區(qū)域的合理重建尚未實(shí)現(xiàn)。

相似的成功體現(xiàn)在成為了冰上運(yùn)動(dòng)訓(xùn)練場所的塔佐利宮殿的建筑上，它所在的位置與重建計(jì)劃中的科爾索—塔佐利軸線相一致，并且為配套設(shè)施不夠完善的工薪階級(jí)區(qū)域提供了體育運(yùn)動(dòng)和室內(nèi)活動(dòng)服務(wù)設(shè)施。

這些案例展示了大型建筑物與開放空間或城市結(jié)構(gòu)相融合的可能性。

3.2 獨(dú)立“對(duì)象”

這恐怕是超大型體育建筑的一個(gè)主要缺點(diǎn)，當(dāng)它們獨(dú)立存在的時(shí)候，很難建立人類尺度與生機(jī)勃勃的城市肌理之間的關(guān)系，而自相矛盾的是，它們的復(fù)雜程度與其巨大的體量并不相稱——不能夠確保諸多賽事在單一建筑內(nèi)無限擴(kuò)張，以此來重新創(chuàng)造城市的活力。這個(gè)現(xiàn)象在雷姆·庫哈斯和布魯斯·毛的著作《S, M, L, XL》中得到了詮釋。

例如，舉辦“意大利 '61”展覽的主樓薇拉宮，經(jīng)過翻修以后，加重了原本就存在的疏離感：玻璃外立面被拆除，取而代之的是一些紅色的體量，與其上的混凝土拱頂脫離開來，顯得毫不相干，而且還因?yàn)榱魇Я嗽瓉泶竺娣e的室內(nèi)空間而讓人不由得產(chǎn)生懷舊之情。

1 都靈2006年冬奧會(huì)總體布局示意/Diagram for the Torino 2006

1 The background of an "Alpine metropolis"

The candidacy and the designation as the host city of the 2006 Winter Olympic Games has been a significant experience for Torino. The relevance to local urban policies can be completely understood with regards to the historical background of the city and, most of all, in the general framework of huge transformations that have been driven by the general masterplan of the city, beginning the early 1990s.

Since the very beginning of the bid in 1998, it was clear that one of the most important features of Torino's candidacy should have been its longstanding relationship with the mountains, which is grounded both on geographical peculiarities and historical reasons. Once the capital of the former Savoy's "Kingdom of Sardinia", which once spanned both sides of the western Alpine chain, Torino preserves in the morphology of its urban fabric a close connection with the surrounding mountains, which in turn encloses the metropolitan plain. The mountain tops that are visible from the city centre thus are not simply "near" to the city, but most of all they are an essential – and somehow "internal" – part of the urban space itself. They are a backdrop of many streets and boulevards; some of them are landmarks visible even from parts of the city centre. A number of local activities and institutions have focused on the Alps, for example, the National Museum of Mountain, founded in 1874, are a proof of the longterm alpine calling of the city, as well as the most important evidence, most likely the birth of the Alpine Club of Italy (CAI), founded in Torino in 1863.

Torino 2006 (fig.1) was not an event that spurred a new tourist vocation of the territory, but instead it was an opportunity to promote worldwide the image of an "Alpine metropolis", by improving an already existing network of sports and leisure facilities, distributed between the mountains and the city.

2 The Olympic venues as a tile of a larger urban vision

The overall territorial strategy for the Olympic works was clearly defined since the beginning, with two opposing strategies, which can be roughly identified by the separation between "snow" activities, located in the mountain venues, and "ice" activities, placed within the city. As a consequence the most "heavy" new structures, and the greater amount of funding, were concentrated in the urban area. Meanwhile, in the mountain venues, major investments had been already been spent for the Alpine Ski World Championships of 1997. Therefore, the strategy was aimed at the improvement and enhancement of these existing facilities, with the additional realization of some specific sports facilities, such as the ski jumps in Pragelato and the bobsleigh track in Cesana-Pariol.

In the first bid proposal, an area in the northern city known as Continassa was chosen as the core of the urban competition venues, thanks to its position- close to the motorway and easily accessible from the local airport – and most importantly to its proximity to DelleAlpi Stadium (now Juventus Stadium). The stadium was originally designated as the site for the main celebrations. Only later, the program changed radically and the Organizing Committee (TOROC) decided to move the urban focal point from the northern edge of the city to the "Lingotto axis", which is part of the new "Central backbone" of the city, as defined in the previous Torino general plan. The geography of the Olympic venues in the metropolitan area has been thus completely reorganized in this progress, passing from an idea of an almost independent sports compound, far from the real city dynamics, to a very compact and integrated mix of competition, training, housing, and service facilities, distributed along the main transformational areas of the city and in relation to surrounding neighborhoods. Consequently the new focus of the Olympics' urban life became the wide green area of Piazza d'Armi, where the former Municipal Stadium was transformed into the new celebrations site, facing the Olympic cauldron.

This change is probably the most notable aspect of the masterplan of the Olympic works, and, since it is strongly related with a larger urban vision that is still ongoing, it could be seen an important key element of the sustainability of the whole operation.

Although the general framework appears consistent, the outcomes of single operations show different levels of achievement and it appears interesting to try to recognize some common features of them.

3 The architecture of the venues: an attempt of a morphological categorization

The Olympic venues and facilities are usually categorized according to different elements, such as function, size, etc. Here we assume a different viewpoint, based on a specific urban design issue; the aim is to propose a critical look focused on the relationships that the new facilities establish with their contexts.

3.1 New public spaces improving urban fabrics

The case of the renovation of the sports compound created in the 1930s, focusing on the former Municipal Stadium and on the new Olympic Ice Hockey Arena, is particularly significant (fig.2). The key of its success was probably the opportunity to incorporate the adjacent public space, transforming a portion of the fronting avenue into a large pedestrian zone and redesigning the large landscaped area of the Piazza d'Armi. The two big volumes mirror themselves in the large lawns of the park, providing a new public amenity in the middle of a high density district. The Olympic Arena is equipped with mobile stands and movable floors that allow the modification of its internal organization and function, and it is adaptable for different uses such as ice sports, indoor sports, concerts, shows, or exhibitions. Next to the arena, a new Swimming Centre complements the facilities offered, although it still awaits a proper renovation of its pedestrian area.

A similar success has been achieved by the Tazzoli Palace. Used for ice sports training, its architecture is coherent with the renovation program of the Corso Tazzoli axis, and provides a point of reference for sports and indoor events within a working class district under-supplied with services.

These case studies show the possibility of conciliating the scale of the large buildings with of the open spaces or the surrounding urban fabric.

3.2 Stand-alone "objects"

This is probably the main drawback of large sport buildings: when left alone, they are too big to establish human scaled relationships with lively urban tissues but, paradoxically, are not complex enough to gain the status of "bigness", meaning the promiscuous proliferation of events in a single large container could recreate the city's vitality itself, as was portrayed by Rem Koolhaas and Bruce Mau in their well-known book, S, M, L, XL.

In the same way, the pre-existing loneliness of "Italia '61" Exhibition main building – the Palazzo Vela – has been in some way stressed by renovation work: the demolition of the glass facades and the construction of some red volumes detached by the concrete vault produce a feeling of extraneousness (but create a nostalgia for having lost an extraordinary indoor spatiality under the dome).

用作速滑冰道的奧沃爾室內(nèi)體育場也有著類似的命運(yùn)，現(xiàn)在它只是沉寂于靈格托舊工廠和鐵路之間一個(gè)廖無人跡的低地。

3.3 居住者的建筑

奧運(yùn)村面臨的最大挑戰(zhàn)就是建立與城市肌理相結(jié)合的真正意義上的居民區(qū)：項(xiàng)目將居住區(qū)的實(shí)施和完成設(shè)想置于一個(gè)棕地（已開發(fā)但處于閑置的地區(qū)）發(fā)展過程的框架中。

政府和私有運(yùn)營者實(shí)施的設(shè)計(jì)方案聚焦于居住環(huán)境的靈活度，在第一階段滿足運(yùn)動(dòng)員村和媒體村的需求，之后作為集體房屋或者投入地產(chǎn)市場：即作為學(xué)生宿舍單元、住宿單元和家庭住宅。為了最大限度保證后期布局的可優(yōu)化性，在設(shè)計(jì)早期就對(duì)植被和結(jié)構(gòu)進(jìn)行了研究。

在眾多對(duì)城市的干預(yù)之中，兩個(gè)大范圍的新區(qū)浮現(xiàn)出來：建于1930年代初的中央果蔬市場的奧運(yùn)村（圖3），以及建于鋼鐵車間“斯皮納3號(hào)”舊址的媒體村。在城市之外，山區(qū)運(yùn)動(dòng)員村地處蘇薩谷的一個(gè)同樣始建于1930年代的日光浴場度假村的舊址，是翻修和再利用成功案例的代表（圖4）。

3.4 建筑即表演

奧運(yùn)會(huì)期間，一個(gè)被三維立體鏡面鋼板包裹的鋼架矗立在位于市中心的卡斯特羅廣場上，看起來就像一個(gè)外星物體。勛章廣場配備了舞臺(tái)、劇院、媒體和公眾服務(wù)設(shè)施、通訊及技術(shù)物流設(shè)備，容納過9000人次，舉辦了55場慶典活動(dòng)以及15次音樂會(huì)。它和歷史背景毫無聯(lián)系。它看起來更像是居依·德波在1967年書中所描述的“景觀社會(huì)”的一次完美實(shí)現(xiàn)。然而，這個(gè)構(gòu)筑物作為鏡子的角色至關(guān)重要：城市在建筑表面中的映像在全球各地的電視上重現(xiàn)，每一次都是獨(dú)一無二的呈現(xiàn)。媒體對(duì)都靈的特色演繹使得人們對(duì)這座城市有了一個(gè)新的感知，實(shí)現(xiàn)了它身份的獨(dú)特性。

3.5 波浪形的景觀

有舵和無舵滑雪軌道、跳臺(tái)滑雪以及其他相似的場所利用了山脈令人印象深刻的標(biāo)志性特點(diǎn)。它們的幾何形態(tài)源于每個(gè)競賽項(xiàng)目的速度規(guī)則，盡管賽事場所以曲折蜿蜒的形態(tài)融入了景觀，但因?yàn)槠涑叨冗h(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)大于人類并形成了鮮明的對(duì)比，這在夏季尤為突出。這些賽道對(duì)原有場地的改變很大，需要景觀和環(huán)境工程兩個(gè)專業(yè)的介入，涉及地質(zhì)學(xué)、水源管理、土壤科學(xué)等等。一系列配套的設(shè)施、看臺(tái)和停車區(qū)相應(yīng)而生，而這些設(shè)施是臨時(shí)的，需要在賽后拆除。

塞薩納的舵滑雪軌道后來遭到廢棄，意味著一個(gè)問題亟待解決。普拉格拉托跳臺(tái)滑雪場在奧運(yùn)會(huì)后重修，在傾斜的山坡上成為了一座“英雄式”的現(xiàn)代建筑（而它距離1930年代建于塞斯特雷的首座建筑并不遠(yuǎn)），強(qiáng)調(diào)了這個(gè)區(qū)域在冬奧會(huì)的身份（圖5）。

4 都靈冬奧會(huì)的遺贈(zèng)

在距離都靈冬奧會(huì)將近10年后的今天，奧運(yùn)會(huì)引發(fā)的轉(zhuǎn)變已經(jīng)有些模糊不清。每個(gè)案例帶來的結(jié)果都不盡相同，因此很難做一個(gè)綜合的評(píng)價(jià)。

那些意在表現(xiàn)強(qiáng)烈典型的奧林匹克形象的建筑，在今天的城市中依然是象征性的地標(biāo)，其中還有一些和重大的城市重建進(jìn)程不謀而合。

位于城市和高山村落中的居住設(shè)施，命運(yùn)分為兩類。一類是在前期準(zhǔn)備階段就進(jìn)行了賽后功能和管理規(guī)劃的項(xiàng)目，基本達(dá)到了預(yù)期的利用效果；另一類因?yàn)楹笃谑褂没蚬芾砺殭?quán)沒有得到適當(dāng)?shù)目紤]而以失敗收尾。

相比之下，競賽場館成敗的衡量標(biāo)準(zhǔn)則在于賽后是否得到有效利用，或者是否能在成本效益的前提下進(jìn)行功能的便捷轉(zhuǎn)化。

總之，奧運(yùn)工程最有趣的方面就是“城市策略”的總體框架，并非被當(dāng)成一座自主和獨(dú)立的主題公園，而是與過去幾十年徹底改變都靈面貌的城市轉(zhuǎn)變緊密相連?！酰Q謝：軸測圖作者法布里齊亞·帕拉尼，薩拉·瑞希亞）

2-5 都靈2006年冬奧會(huì)場館設(shè)施軸測圖/Axo drawings of Torino 2006 (繪圖/Illustrated by Fabrizia Parlani, Sara Ressia)

A similar destiny seems to be shared by the indoor sports stadium for speed skating, the Oval, which is now sunken into a wide no man's land of parking between the former Lingotto factory and the railway.

3.3 Architectures for inhabitants

The main challenge for the Olympic villages was the possibility to create some authentic residential neighbourhoods that are integrated in the urban fabric: the program envisaged the implementation and completion of residential interventions in the framework of a brownfield redevelopment process.

The design strategy followed by public and private operators focused on the flexibility of the dwellings, able to fulfil the athletes and media village requirements in the first phase, and the ability to be reused for either collective housing, residential units for students, accommodation units, or residences for families. The possibility of optimising further adaptations for distribution, plants and infrastructure has been studied since the beginning of the design process.

Among the many interventions within the city, two new districts emerge: the Olympic Village (fig.3), related to the renovation of the General Market (originally built as a market for fruits and vegetables in the 1930s), and the Media Village, built on the former site of Spina 3, a series of iron and steel plants. Outside the city, the mountain Athletes' village was located in the Susa Valley in a former heliotherapic resort also dating from the 1930s, representing a successful case of restoration and reuse (fig.4).

3.4 Architecture as show

During the games, a three-dimensional steel girder covered with reflecting steel panels appeared as an alien object in the city centre's main historic square, the Piazza Castello. The piazza was transformed into Medals Plaza - which included a stage, a theatre, sets, services for the press and the public, and communications and logistics equipment. During the Olympics, the plaza could contain 9000 people, and hosted 55 celebrations and 15 concerts, without assuming any relationship at all with its historic context. It seemed to be a perfect materialisation of the "society of the spectacle", described by Guy Debord in his 1967 book. However, it had a great importance as a mirror: the city seen from that building, and reproduced worldwide via television, would never have been the same; the representation of Torino seen through media offered a new perception of the city, reinforcing its identity.

3.5 Waving forms in the landscape

The bobsleigh and luge track, the ski jumps, and other similar venues drew on the mountains impressive features. Their geometries derived from the rules of every discipline, and though they fit into the landscape with their meandering lines, they possess a wider scale than the human one, which also greatly contrasts with it, especially in the summertime. They have modified a significant portion of these sites, requiring interventions both of landscaping and environmental engineering, the latter of which involves geology, water management, and soil science. They brought with themselves a number of facilities, tribunes, parking areas, that were required to be temporary and were removed after the events.

The Cesana bobsleigh track has suffered from disuse, representing a problem that needs to be solved. The Pragelato ski jumps were renovated after the Games, standing on the slope as "heroic" modern architecture (not so far from the architecture of the 1930s in Sestriere), underlining the winter sport identity of this part of the valley (fig.5).

4 What could be learned from the legacy of Torino Olympics?

Almost 10 years after the event, an overall glance of the Olympic transformations returns a slightly blurred image. The results greatly differ from case to case, and a comprehensive opinion is still difficult to be expressed.

Several of the most iconic buildings, meant to create a strong and recognizable image of the Olympics, still remain today symbolic places of the city, and some of these have coincided with important urban regeneration processes.

The residential facilities within the city and the alpine villages obtained the envisaged effects only when post-event functions and management had been previously planned during the preparation stages, but failed when either the uses or the managing authorities had not been properly considered.

The success of the competition venues therefore depended on the possibility of being effectively utilized after the event for their original use, or instead being easily converted into other costeffective purposes.

Above all, the most interesting aspect of the Olympic works is the general framework of an "urban strategy", not conceived as an autonomous and independent thematic park, but rather closely connected with the transformations that have been changing the face of Torino in the past few decades.□ (Acknowledgements: the axonometric drawings that illustrate this article are by Fabrizia Parlani and Sara Ressia. )

都靈理工大學(xué)建筑設(shè)計(jì)系

2015-08-15