Modernism

The field of planning is constantly changing and when developing plans we must not only look at what is relevant within the current context but what will continue to work in harmony with the future social, environmental and economic needs as society continues to develop and change. The enormous flood of people seeking city life constantly challenges planners in cities around the world. With rapid changes in economies, technology and culture within cities the profession of planning has become increasingly important in making these seemingly chaotic places functional.

I found a definite parallel between one concepts of movement to the next. An example of this is The Parks movement shifting towards the Garden City movement and then to the City Beautiful movement. Elements of the Parks City movement can be seen in the City Beautiful movement. The point is that it is much easier to start off with an idea than to build from no idea at all. Once an idea is formed or a plan is established, this gives some sort of foundation to build and rebuild. We can see this follow-on effect over the movements and is still true today. 

From the effects of the industrial revolution and the depression came the Parks Movement, which was one of the first responses to social displacement of industrial urbanism. In conjunction with this I found the Garden City Ideal to be very interesting, the idea to improve health through a plan, which proposed to eliminate congestion (caused by the industrial revolution and depression) and keep the open countryside at hand.

As modernism continues the concepts of the last centuries become outdated and unsustainable. What will the new concepts created in response to sustainable growth, climate change and congested cities be? Also have the concepts of the past made it harder to develop compact cities?

Art vs Science

This weeks reading was focused on the balance between art and science in planning and its continual change throughout time.

Planning has been around for a while (starting in 1917) when planning originated it drew heavily from design, craft and presentation or "capturing the art". Over time there has been a gradual shift from planning as an art form to planning involving science, this gradual shift has lead to art and science being somewhat balanced in their importance to the planning profession. With technology developing so quickly and a rapidly growing population a science input is needed to further progress the profession, in conjunction the artistic concepts need to be utilised and further developed, this in turn creating a combined effect of art and science to be applied in the new cities of today.

As planning evolved from an architectural background there was greater emphasis in the past of planning being an art with more focus on design principals. However, throughout time and with the development of technology and greater emphasis on social policy, there have been swings toward accepting planning as a science. I believe for successful planning there must be elements of both as planning cannot be completely design or logic alone.

Art and science have always been linked, with many famous artists using science in the creative process. Planners have always combined the two i.e the city beautiful concept. Art and science both mirror the societal needs and ideologies of the time. Planning combines the two aspects to meet the aesthetic and societal needs. Planning today reflects the current need for sustainability and for creating a sustainable future.

For and Against Planning

Rickard Klosterman’s article “arguments for and against planning” 1985 gives us an insight of what many different arguments, opinions, theories and approaches society had towards planning in the mid 1980’s.  Reading this article it is clear, that almost thirty years ago urban planning was not as relevant and well accepted as it is today.

The planning profession has evolved to meet the needs of a modern city. Over time it has showed its ability to be able to adapt to the changes in society. Starting off from humble beginnings as a profession to only looking at the physical side of a town. It seemed to only fulfil basic needs of a town and to work problems out behind closed doors. The profession today has come out from behind closed doors to incorporate all surfaces of life whether they are social, economic or environmental ideals.

These ideals exceed the principles of planning being just the physical nature of buildings. Planning today is about much more than just the buildings but the ways these building will effect people and their behaviours ( ie. Attract low socio-economic status people therefore creating areas of slums and high crime rates). It shows the need that planning is not done behind closed doors but is a dynamic process that needs to be done in conjunction with the people it effects ( the community).

Today this industry cannot be ignored with pressing issues e.g. population growth and limited resources. I think that the government and society expects planners and the industry to clean up the mess of the past due to a lack of planning. It is important that planning continues to evolve in the future.

I wonder what else it may incorporate and models that may be presented within the future! All and all it is an exciting profession to enter as it continues to evolve and remain relevant!