Urban planning

Urban planning

Urban planning is a concept that has existed for over a century. In its modern origins, it existed as a social movement for urban reforms. The social change demanded reforms that arose in the latter part of the 19th century. The encroaching industrial city disordered the city at that time. Most of the visionaries of the period sought for an ideal city. There were practical concerns about what they were attempting to achieve. The town required adequate sanitation, movement of goods and people, provision of amenities, and the need to plan. The social change decided to get contemporary planners who would balance the conflicting demands of social equity. The main agenda of the group was to include; social capital, economic growth, environmental sensitivity, and an aesthetic appeal. The social movement and their proposal worked out and led to a formal master plan. The official master plan went out for a metropolitan area. They came up with a metro area with a neighborhood plan, a project plan, and they set out policies that would ensure the implementation of a perfect urban place. What was clear from the application was the role of entrepreneurship.

There was a need to have an entrepreneur on the part of planning, sponsors, and insulate from politics. However, the aspect of politics was not focused on by the original urban planning social movements. (Thesis) In recent times, authors of urban planning have initiated the role of politics in urban planning. Authors like La Rosa, Spyra, & Inostroza (2016), have mentioned the part of politics in urban planning as a mere provision of political astuteness. It is also through politics that the bases of the government come in handy to help in the development of urban areas. The politics of planning also involves private sector participation, where the private sector through public-private partnerships engages urban planners in the benefit of the metropolitan city. In this paper, an analysis of four texts provides further depth on the role of politics in urban planning.

In the first text, Datta & Shaban, (2016), the authors introduce a 3P perspective on the role of politics on urban planning. 3P in this context is power, politics, and planning. The author illustrates how the three are connected so that urban planning entirely depends on political will.

Firstly, the text illustrates that planning is about the initial space. Some of the initial spaces that the implementation of urban planning is required are contested. At times the areas are owned by very wealthy men who make it difficult for them to implement urban planning. In such a contested space, the political goodwill and the involvement of the government deliberate and discriminatory actions against the weaker population. Political goodwill in urban planning makes many cases inequitable, implicitly biased, and reflects on promises to make the public place better at the expense of personal properties.

Additionally, spatial contradictions of urban spaces that are supposed to cater to the implementation of urban planning attract political solutions. Political conflicts are always played out between social benefits, economic powers, and political forces. All three connect themselves in elements of space.

In summary, politics play a role in shaping architectural space. With the case of Palestine, politics underestimated the relative significance of urban planning to those of life aspects. The examination of analytical spatial context made some people to be removed from their residential places and get moved without being compensated. The role of power is seen clearly in the case of Palestine.

From the text analysis, it is clear that the implementation of urban planning politically disadvantages the people on the lower economy of the class. Politics as a measure of the relation of urban planning plays a significant role in defining the lifestyle of the lower social level, forcing them to meet regular challenges.

In the following text by, Fuller, & Moore, (2017), politics is defined as a role in regional sustainable development. The author examines the role of politics and public involvement while focusing on the planning of Siberian Cities. Focusing on the analysis of Siberian cities, politics influences urban planning through the provision of social, economic, and transportation amenities. The government provides its political needs to the urban planners during the city make-up. Those with political needs analyze the government’s requirements for its people. It is these needs that the planners are seeking to implement. For the Siberian city, the influence of urban planning was put on the will of the political class to construct a railway system. The political class needed to eliminate the problem of transport link with the Siberian City. There was also a need to supply goods to the city (Fuller & Moore, 2017). The local Siberian products needed to find a market to import their goods as other products came in. Warehouses in the city had become useless. An alternative was derived to construct a railway station that could help in the completion of main traffic directions and opening up the Siberian town to the world (Fuller, & Moore, 2017). From the analysis of the text, there is a creation of political class as the determinant of the urban planning process. From Siberian City, the political class was looking for a way to make the place a better place. It is therefore clear that politics influence urban planning through exerting there economic and development will concentrate on the spaces in the city.

Most importantly, the text declares that urban planners and implementers work for the political class. It is the will of the political course that is being implemented during urban planning. The intention of being a social movement is not taken into consideration anymore.

Another perspective of politics in the implementation of urban planning comes from bureaucracy. In Bureaucratic states, the official rationale of involving politics stems from the transference of power from the people to a government through democratic processes. The text by Béné et al. (2018) explains that the government is elected by the people to represent their interests. The political goodwill of the people is represented by the government that they have put in place. The government, when in place, introduces a bureau that investigates the needs of the urban center and gives it to the people. The Bureau, through political processes, invites public participation of persons living within the urban areas. During the implementation of urban planning, the opinion of each of the members is taken into consideration. Each of the ideas is considered and analyzed for the sake of application during implementation. The political will and public participation of such a bureaucratic process are so transparent so that those affected by urban planning are sure to be compensated. Unlike the political class of lousy will, in this text, the political class only acts as representatives of the people. The implementers of the public plan work for the people. Such political role is different from dictatorial formats where the political classes only implement policies from the political class and only shove them to the public as tokenism that only serves to pass information.

The entire above analyzed political role are in congruence analysis provided in chapter five of the city reader (LeGates, & Stout, 2015). Chapter five of the city reader explains the political role of urban planning. According to the authors of chapter five, urban planning and local politics work together to achieve urban implementation (LeGates, & Stout, 2015). Everything that affects the city for a wrong and right leads to economic profit or loss, quality of the suburban life that supports those who live near the area, and urban renewal. In the urban text renewal and historic preservation is a decision made through local politics.

Additionally, the text illustrates that planning as a process involves the implementation of decisions by policymakers. Policymakers in many of the cases or urban planning are the political class. The intervention of politics is required in the management and the administration of urban planning. The text also goes ahead to recognize that most politicians would love to get involved in the process of urban planning because of the political rewards they would get. Many actors participate in the urban planning process, but politics take center stage too. The paper mainly warns about engaging in urban planning with our interests. It reminds me that any personal stakes involved in urban planning limit the success of getting the professional and technical aspects of the projects.

In conclusion, as analyzed in all the articles, urban planning is an essential process of getting a beautiful city. However, unlike the social movement that initiated the process of beauty aesthetics, politics has influenced the process of urban planning. The thesis statement is, therefore, a logical one. Bureaucrats, politicians, entrepreneurs, planners, and the general public have in the previous engaged in persuasions that try to convince urban planners to consider their personal, group, or institutional interests. Underlying, it is essential to focus on the professional and technical aspects of planning so that all the pressure from political roles are limited. The outcome of the professional and technical aspects of urban planning is entirely sustainable than political interests. Political interest limits urban application planning properly, though it plays a significant role in its implementation.