【文章內容簡介】 ther in an inappropriate way’’ (Nafisi, 1964, p. 426). There was a feeling that something urgently needed to be done, but the municipality was not legally or financially capable of dealing with this process. The 1966 Municipality Act provided, for the first time, a legal framework for the formation of the Urban Planning High Council and for the establishment of landuse planning in the form of prehensive plans. A series of other laws followed, underpinning new legal and institutional arrangements for the Tehran municipality, allowing the Ministry of Housing and others to work together in managing the growth of the city. The most important step taken in planning was the approval of the Tehran Comprehensive Plan in 1968. It was produced by a consortium of Aziz Farmanfarmaian Associates of Iran and Victor Gruen Associates of the 武漢科技大學本科畢業(yè)設計外文翻譯 7 United States, under the direction of Fereydun Ghaffari, an Iranian city planner (Ardalan, 1986). The plan identified the city’s problems as high density, especially in the city centre。 expansion of mercial activities along the main roads。 pollution。 inefficient infrastructure。 widespread unemployment in the poorer areas, and the continuous migration of lowine groups to Tehran. The solution was to be found in the transformation of the city’s physical, social and economic fabric (Farmanfarmaian and Gruen, 1968). The proposals were, nevertheless, mostly advocating physical change, attempting, in a modernist spirit, to impose a new order onto this plex metropolis. The future of the city was envisaged to be growing westward in a linear polycentric form, reducing the density and congestion of the city centre. The city would be formed of 10 large urban districts, separated from each other by green belts,each with about 500,000 inhabitants, a mercial and an industrial centre with highrise buildings. Each district (mantagheh) would be subdivided into a number of areas (nahyeh) and neighborhoods (mahalleh). An area, with a population of about 15–30,000, would have a high school and a mercial centre and other necessary facilities. A neighborhood, with its 5000 inhabitants, would have a primary school and a local mercial centre. These districts and areas would be linked by a transportation work, which included motorways, a rapid transit route and a bus route. The stops on the rapid transit route would be developed as the nodes for concentration of activities with a high residential density. A number of redevelopment and improvement schemes in the existing urban areas would relocate 600,000 people out of the central areas (Farmanfarmaian and Gruen, 1968). Almost all these measures can be traced to the fashionable planning ideas of the time, which were largely influenced by the British New Towns. In his book, The Heart of Our Cities, Victor Gruen(1965) had envisaged the metropolis of tomorrow as a central city surrounded by 10 additional cities,each with its own centre. This resembled Ebenezer Howard’s (1960, p. 142) ‘‘social cities’’, in which a central city was surrounded by a cluster of garden cities. In Tehran’s plan, a linear version of this concept was used. Another linear concept, which was used in the British New Towns of the time such as Redditch and Runcorn, was the importance of public transport routes as the town’s spine, with its stopping points serving as its foci. The use of neighborhood units of limited population, focused on a neighborhood centre and a primary school, was widely used in these New Towns, an idea that had been developed in the 1920s in the United States (Mumford, 1954). These ideas remained, however, largely on paper. Some of the plan’s ideas that were implemented, which were rooted in American city planning, included a work