Seminar Two: Modern and Early Urban Planning

This reading by Richard T. LeGates and Frederic Stout explain the the rapid growth of cities during the period after the Industrial Revolution. The growth of factories in inner city and urban areas as well as the establishment of the transportation hubs and markets led to rapidly increased population shifts from regional and rural areas to urban metropolises. All these events which eventuated from the course of the Industrial Revolution is the reason why Urban and Regional Planning is seen as a profession today. It is highly unusual to praise difficult situations for the recognition of the planning profession but as planners we must understand that sometimes dim circumstances can lead to positive outcomes and this reading seems to demonstrate that clearly. If we look at the post-Industrial Revolution in cities it was evident that the rapid population that accompanied that wasn't going to magically fall in place where everyone would be housed without any problems. The lack of planning at the time led to extreme shortages in housing which of course led to urban slums and increased poverty. The Great Depression called upon the government to take action during the greatest financial crisis of the modern era. The New Deal implemented by Franklin D. Roosevelt led to the creation of thousands of jobs such as construction of many new post offices. Large scale projects were put in place such as the Hoover Dam which generated plenty of jobs.

The turn of the 20th century, in my opinion, is one of the most pivotal of the modern era due to evolving cities, new movements (such as The Parks Movement),as well as the upbringing of many academics and architects who stimulated new ideas and approaches such as Le Courbusier and Frank Lloyd Wright. I was quite intrigued when I read that Le Courbusier orchestrated the theory that cities should serve as the 'administration centre of the bureaucratic, technocratic state'. Also, Lloyd's idea of the 'Usonion' House couldn't have come at a better time especially during the course of the post Second World War where a population boom scattered most suburban areas outside of major cities in the United States. Frederick Law Olmsted was also a significant figure in improving the urban setting. He realized that real plans should 'distinguish' from nominal paper plans as it 'actually expresses the collective will of the community'. This led to vast changes in which master plans are created and explained. These new ideas as well as the idea of separation of pedestrians and automobiles formulated the modern urban setting as we see it today. All these developments are essential for a Planners understanding of the modern urban setting as it provides the backbone for future references in which we can look back and figure out where and how they got it right in such difficult circumstances. Overall, this reading was extremely stimulating and I highly recommend this read to Planners and Planners-in-training.

Have a Great Week

Boutros Hanna

Seminar One: Arguments For and Against Planning

The reading Arguments for and Against Planning by Robert E. Klosterman with the following presentation conducted by Alex and James in seminar three presented four highly debated topics which have been controversial not only within the profession of planning but during the course of the 20th century. The arguments for and against planning in the fields of economics, Pluralism, Traditionalism and Marxism have sparked intense discussions in the academic world about the validity of planning.

The economic arguments in the reading presented quite startling approaches in which planning and reducing regulations was called upon to be abandoned in favour of private entrepreneurship and competition among market forces. It is sensible to believe that markets should in itself allow to flow within the framework of Laisser-Faire. I believe that government interference is required in an event of a recession or, worse, depression. Planners must understand the economic situations that reverberates around them so they can properly assess situations for example an increase to land values can affect constructions to new transportation systems a community may require. Economics play an integral part of a planner’s profession and planners must always be aware of the economic surroundings. Planning must remain as it is and never in the hands of entrepreneurial opportunists who undervalue the importance of this profession. 

The arguments brought forward by Pluralists, Traditionalists and Marxists all provide different views and alternatives for the profession of planning. However as planners we must understand that not all ideologies can fit into an ever-changing world. The arguments brought forward by the three ideologies reflect the need to recognize planning as a mean of serving the interests of societies but they differ when arguing the processes in which this must be done in. All arguments amongst the three ideological perspectives clearly state that planning must never be undermined in the modern era as it is required to represent the vast interests of an ever-changing society. I believe to an extent that government intervention should be relative in communities where it is needed most and not to a point where it is not required and can lead to heavy negative impacts. 

In conclusion, the reading sets an understanding that us planners must be aware of groups which potentially pose dangers to interests of communities. The reading was intriguing and very stimulating and does indeed set the standards for what planners need to know in order to succeed in the profession. 

Here are some of the photos taken from the second seminar in which we were split into groups and instructed to come up with ideas and areas in which planning contributes to or affects. 

Fifty Theses on Urban Planning and Urban Planners - My response

As a newcomer to the field of Urban Planning I initially believed that the profession was primarily structured to serve several purposes of the community such as deciding on where major transport facilities should be placed and how they would generate revenue based its location and economic geography, however it is interesting that the author of "Fifty Theses on Urban Planning and Urban Planners" Raphael Fischler claims it to be "ill-defined". He elaborates further by claiming that their is a large uncertainty within the profession due to the ever-evolving cities, small communities and economic sectors. It strikes me to understand that an Urban Planner is someone who in this day and age must have his two hands full, such as taking responsibilities beyond the realms of what this profession is 'suppose' to serve. The profession of Planning rose from the heights of the industrial Revolution to serve the rapidly growing middle-class however, today, it must instigate ways to ensure the positive progress of cities and local communities. I find it interesting that Urban planning stems out to all other forms of professions such architecture and engineering (multi-disciplinary field) in order to be able to prepare plans. He is reasonable to say that this profession is for the "bright, motivated and courageous" due to the intensity of this profession in pursuit of  improving our way of life in cities and communities. However I do believe that someone like an architect or an engineer should at least share some of our responsibilities considering planners work in the same arena. They are educated as we are and should have studied the foundations of management and being able to converse and assist with clients. However, I do accept the greater responsibilities laid onto us planners in cities and communities. Campuses, airports, broadband networks, environmental awareness, population growth, infrastructure are all evolving elements within our communities and there is no doubt that Urban Planners will need to step up to the plate and ensure that the future is bright for cities and local communities.