Urban planning community | #theplannerlife
+ Reply to thread
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Ever feel like planning has gotten too big?

  1. #1
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Feb 2013
    Location
    The Midwest, God's gift to Planet Earth
    Posts
    360

    Ever feel like planning has gotten too big?

    Planning nowadays, particularly if you're in a large urban area, encompasses so much more than traditional land use. Public health, technology, food systems, transportation, housing, law, environment, economic development, climate change, resiliency, public administration/public policy, land banking, sociology, cartography, community development, community organizing, criminal justice, social equity...they're all now considered within the realm of "planning". Add to that the explosion of professional and research organizations related to planning + a bajillion websites that write or disseminate planning news and you've got an information overload. Planning changes so much nowadays and everyone has so many opinions that it's so hard to keep up!

    Anyone else feel overwhelmed sometimes? I feel like I'm missing out or behind the curve if I don't read at least 2-3 articles a day and listen to 1 webinar a week or something...and I don't even need CM credits!

  2. #2
    Cyburbian dvdneal's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Remote command post at local bar
    Posts
    12,530
    It kind of annoys me how many fields planning is trying to get involved in. I'm a pick something and be good at that kind of person. I understand getting into health planning or whatever is right for some places, but I would rather plan for a generally active downtown and if that happens to benefit public health that's even better. I'm like you, I just can't keep up.
    I don't pretend to understand Brannigan's Law. I merely enforce it.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally posted by akshali2000 View post
    Planning nowadays, particularly if you're in a large urban area, encompasses so much more than traditional land use. Public health, technology, food systems, transportation, housing, law, environment, economic development, climate change, resiliency, public administration/public policy, land banking, sociology, cartography, community development, community organizing, criminal justice, social equity...they're all now considered within the realm of "planning". Add to that the explosion of professional and research organizations related to planning + a bajillion websites that write or disseminate planning news and you've got an information overload. Planning changes so much nowadays and everyone has so many opinions that it's so hard to keep up!

    Anyone else feel overwhelmed sometimes? I feel like I'm missing out or behind the curve if I don't read at least 2-3 articles a day and listen to 1 webinar a week or something...and I don't even need CM credits!
    I love how transportation planning is just thrown in with the rest of the lot.

    This is probably another reason why there are so many varying views on the credibility of AICP. It's clearly more beneficial for traditional land use planners than someone doing transportation or economic development. Resiliency planning seems to be the new buzz word these days after the short-lived sustainability planning. Community development may also start to fade if the current administration get their way on the budget. In my community these days, economic development and growth Trump traditional traditional-land-use considerations. The field is still evolving.
    The content contrarian

  4. #4
    Cyburbian michaelskis's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Somewhere between the mountains and the ocean.
    Posts
    18,597
    Years ago a college professor told us that "Planning" is an attempt at social engineering while attempting to navigate the world of politics. Things like transportation, historic preservation, landscaping, form based codes, context sensitive design, parks and recreation planning, zoning codes, future land use plan, sub area plans, area specific plans, DDA, TIF districts, overlay districts, main street programs, tourism, and all the other aspects of planning are tools in the tool box. And much like building a house, different people need to use different tools and varrious points in the process with the expectation of having a predetermined outcome.

    "Planning" the way I learned it was not just about land use, but it was how people interacted with the environment and each other.
    If you want different results in your life, you need to do different things than you have done in the past. Change is that simple.

  5. #5
    Chairman of the bored Maister's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2004
    Location
    on my 15 minute break
    Posts
    24,221
    It does seem like our fingers are in rather more pots than they used to, doesn' t it? But it seems like more often than not it's been things thrust upon us, not something we actively sought out. Kinda like public school teachers.
    People will miss that it once meant something to be Southern or Midwestern. It doesn't mean much now, except for the climate. The question, “Where are you from?” doesn't lead to anything odd or interesting. They live somewhere near a Gap store, and what else do you need to know? - Garrison Keillor

  6. #6
    Cyburbian Masswich's avatar
    Registered
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ocean to the east, land to the west
    Posts
    1,302
    My take on this is slightly different. The challenge in modern, scientific society is to compartmentalize. Planners try to get society to think about negative impacts from one improvement on another field. It's messy and hard to measure but that's what I see as the quintessential "there" in planning, unless you are thinking about planning as land use regulation (which is a lot of what is done today, I get that.)

  7. #7
    Cyburbian dvdneal's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Remote command post at local bar
    Posts
    12,530
    My problem goes more with how we talk about all the topics. If we take land use and transportation with a couple others as the biggest parts of planning. At least daily function terms. That's great, but we talk about at conferences are all the little fringe topics like resiliency, sustainability, and more. If I have to here one more lecture on bike lanes I'll have to shoot someone. If you did one of those key word things where the most common words are huuge I'd bet resiliency or health planning are on top and land use and transportation are tiny words. It's like we don't talk about the core part of the job and try to get people going on new stuff. I understand the push to get people excited on new projects, but I still like hearing about transportation stuff or basic changes in land use. Maybe I'm just boring, but maybe it's just that a lot of the fringe stuff doesn't affect me as much in the middle of nowhere.
    I don't pretend to understand Brannigan's Law. I merely enforce it.

  8. #8
    Cyburbian MacheteJames's avatar
    Registered
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC area
    Posts
    928
    "If planning is everything, maybe it is nothing?"

    I do agree with the OP, especially now that we have now evidently taken on fields such as public health and workforce development within the auspices of planning. I don't have a problem being a multi-disciplinarian, but if I'm going to have the cognitive workload of a practicing attorney, why aren't I making attorney money?

    *Looking at the APA's direction right now*

  9. #9
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    196
    I think 'planning' has gone the way of 'architect'. You could be a brick and mortar architect, landscape architect, network architect, bridge architect, etc. But yeah, long range planning has started to encroach on a lot of non-traditional planning areas. That's why I prefer current planning.

  10. #10
    Cyburbian The One's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Vegas BABY!!
    Posts
    8,285
    Blog entries
    1

    Wow

    Quote Originally posted by michaelskis View post
    Years ago a college professor told us that "Planning" is an attempt at social engineering while attempting to navigate the world of politics. Things like transportation, historic preservation, landscaping, form based codes, context sensitive design, parks and recreation planning, zoning codes, future land use plan, sub area plans, area specific plans, DDA, TIF districts, overlay districts, main street programs, tourism, and all the other aspects of planning are tools in the tool box. And much like building a house, different people need to use different tools and varrious points in the process with the expectation of having a predetermined outcome.

    "Planning" the way I learned it was not just about land use, but it was how people interacted with the environment and each other.
    Your prof had a BLOATED sense of power in planning. Obviously wrong. In a capitalist democracy, the control, distribution and manipulation of money is almost the only way to accomplish social engineering (redlining is the most famous example). The social engineering we have in place right now is due to billionaires and bankers and their paid for politicians.
    “The way of acquiescence leads to moral and spiritual suicide. The way of violence leads to bitterness in the survivors and brutality in the destroyers. But, the way of non-violence leads to redemption and the creation of the beloved community.”
    Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
    - See more at: http://www.thekingcenter.org/king-ph....r7W02j3S.dpuf

  11. #11
    Super Moderator luckless pedestrian's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2005
    Location
    in a meeting
    Posts
    10,506
    Quote Originally posted by michaelskis View post
    Years ago a college professor told us that "Planning" is an attempt at social engineering while attempting to navigate the world of politics. Things like transportation, historic preservation, landscaping, form based codes, context sensitive design, parks and recreation planning, zoning codes, future land use plan, sub area plans, area specific plans, DDA, TIF districts, overlay districts, main street programs, tourism, and all the other aspects of planning are tools in the tool box. And much like building a house, different people need to use different tools and varrious points in the process with the expectation of having a predetermined outcome.

    "Planning" the way I learned it was not just about land use, but it was how people interacted with the environment and each other.
    I get the social engineering comment mostly at angry public meetings but I like the bolded text as that's what it is and so it does encompass everything

    Quote Originally posted by Maister View post
    It does seem like our fingers are in rather more pots than they used to, doesn' t it? But it seems like more often than not it's been things thrust upon us, not something we actively sought out. Kinda like public school teachers.
    at a past job, I took on economic development to save the position from becoming unfunded - it was a band-aid approach that only last a couple of years but I know many planners have done the same thing

    in my past position they did it because they couldn't afford three people on staff so they threw all three needs (Planning, community development and economic development) into one person - it was exhausting though the skill set of a basic planner can translate into all three

    Quote Originally posted by Masswich View post
    My take on this is slightly different. The challenge in modern, scientific society is to compartmentalize. Planners try to get society to think about negative impacts from one improvement on another field. It's messy and hard to measure but that's what I see as the quintessential "there" in planning, unless you are thinking about planning as land use regulation (which is a lot of what is done today, I get that.)
    this is the argument for a comprehensive plan - that all elements of community life impact each other so a plan, produced by a planner, coordinates and meshes all the data and policies together to help make it make sense and not be contradictory.

    it's what I love about planning and it's what makes my attention issues go batty in planning lol

  12. #12
    Cyburbian HomerJ's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2010
    Location
    I'm gettin' there
    Posts
    1,026
    Great question and discussion.

    In terms of sentiment I agree with the critique of planning in terms of social engineering, we can't be all things to all people. That being said, I also agree with The One in that most of the aggression displayed towards urban planning seems to be a misplaced assumption over how much control local gov't planners really have. Perhaps if comp plans were literally tied into annual/capital budgets consistently there would be a stronger argument over the amount of authority local government planners exercise.

    Maybe the reality is that planners should embrace being a very unique kind of politician. We are long-term (perhaps 10-20ish year term limit) reps who have been administratively appointed, which is why it is so hard for us to take definitive stances on complex multi-generational social issues .

    I would provide one suggestion for local planners, which perhaps ironically is to add yet another hat, that of the local historian. If we are going to be at the table for any and every possible decision being made that may have an impact on the built environment, there is a subtle artfulness in being able to show how a community's line of thinking and assumptions are usually parallel to situations we have already encountered in the past. We never seem to collectively take enough interest in untying knots we have already made, which seems to be a perfect recipe for creating new problems in the future.
    Insanity in individuals is something rare - but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.

  13. #13
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Eastern Canada
    Posts
    114
    I think part of the problem is that the planning department is often the only city department that goes out and consults with people. So we become the dumping ground for all comments and suggestions for how to improve the city. And then we feel obligated to do something with the feedback people took the time to give us. So then we put "motherhood" statements in our plans about siting health facilities, and food deserts, and working with transportation authorities, and changing the building code, and blah blah blah.

    For what it's worth, I've made it my personal mission to cut out as much of the non-core-planning stuff out of any plan I do.

+ Reply to thread

More at Cyburbia

  1. I feel like I missed a lot in here
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 18
    Last post: 12 Apr 2013, 5:50 PM
  2. Do you ever feel.....inadequate?
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 17
    Last post: 16 Apr 2012, 10:33 AM
  3. Make Me Feel Better About 40...
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 22
    Last post: 01 May 2011, 10:21 AM
  4. How does everyone feel about this?
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 6
    Last post: 02 Dec 2005, 12:37 PM
  5. Did you feel that?
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 5
    Last post: 28 Jun 2004, 4:11 PM