New Directions In Planning Theory
Susan Fainstein
This week the reading explored the ideas of the Communicative model, New Urbanism and a Just City.
These three models are fantastic to theorise, but to what extent are they implemented? In my understanding and I’m sure somewhat naivety I think Communicative Planning and New Urbanism are much easier to address than a Just City.
Although community consultation is not an easy thing to negotiate it is easy to gauge the result obtained from the communication that has taken place. In reference to New Urbanism it is a way of thinking which can also be easily gauged through the design orientation that is practiced. When looking at a Just City how do you really measure it? There is always going to be someone or a group of people that are underrepresented. I think it is a great concept and theory but I do not think it is a guide line which should be studied alone. This is not to say that a Just City and therefore Society are not important, but I do not think that it can just be set aside as an ideology and not integrated with other ideologies and thinking. When looking at a Just City in isolation it almost looks unachievable as a concept to be improved on. The flow-on effect from this is a build up of the problem which is then too great to be tackled. It is then just bypassed completely as it has become too hard and complex. When you think about it how many times has this happened in your community project? Was it achievable when the plan was simplistic?
Good criticism and skepticism of the practicality of Just City as a theory. It is interesting to observe the "values" Susan attached to HER theory of Just City in writing. Her criticism of the other two theories, for me, is right, but not necessarily fair. As I explained, you just cannot aim at 'killing eight planning birds in the woods'. It is good theory if it can kill one or two planning birds. Richard
ReplyDelete