Comments on: Elitism of Urban Planning http://washingtonindependent.com/2203/elitism-of-urban-planning National News in Context Tue, 31 Jan 2012 02:40:51 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: sbranca http://washingtonindependent.com/2203/elitism-of-urban-planning/comment-page-1#comment-2919 sbranca Wed, 27 Feb 2008 22:19:37 +0000 http://www.washingtonindependent.com.php5-9.websitetestlink.com/?p=2203#comment-2919 Mary Kane has a point, but so does Chris Leinberger. As someone who has worked in and around the planning profession for nigh on to 30 years (gulp), my main beef with this story is the headline. It says - or means to imply - that urban planning is elitist. GOOD urban planning is not; it attempts to promote equity, diversity, opportunity and environmental quality to make better places to live for everyone. Planners are often thwarted in this effort by politicians and developers who choose not to use their influence to promote community values over profit and expedience.<br><br><br><br>First, let's distinguish between "planning" and "design." Planning takes into account a wide range of factors including social conditions, demographics, environmental impacts, the synergistic effects of a mix of uses, infrastructure, externalities, and on and on. Design is far more limited than that. (Architects often market themselves as "planners." Don't fall for it.) Design is very important and should be part of all good planning, but it is only one part of real town planning. If some of the products of good design - Kentlands, Seaside - turn out to appeal to a well-healed clientele, that is because their aesthetics are good and valued by Mary Kane has a point, but so does Chris Leinberger. As someone who has worked in and around the planning profession for nigh on to 30 years (gulp), my main beef with this story is the headline. It says – or means to imply – that urban planning is elitist. GOOD urban planning is not; it attempts to promote equity, diversity, opportunity and environmental quality to make better places to live for everyone. Planners are often thwarted in this effort by politicians and developers who choose not to use their influence to promote community values over profit and expedience.

First, let's distinguish between "planning" and "design." Planning takes into account a wide range of factors including social conditions, demographics, environmental impacts, the synergistic effects of a mix of uses, infrastructure, externalities, and on and on. Design is far more limited than that. (Architects often market themselves as "planners." Don't fall for it.) Design is very important and should be part of all good planning, but it is only one part of real town planning. If some of the products of good design – Kentlands, Seaside – turn out to appeal to a well-healed clientele, that is because their aesthetics are good and valued by

]]> By: sbranca http://washingtonindependent.com/2203/elitism-of-urban-planning/comment-page-1#comment-1962 sbranca Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.washingtonindependent.com.php5-9.websitetestlink.com/?p=2203#comment-1962 Mary Kane has a point, but so does Chris Leinberger. As someone who has worked in and around the planning profession for nigh on to 30 years (gulp), my main beef with this story is the headline. It says - or means to imply - that urban planning is elitist. GOOD urban planning is not; it attempts to promote equity, diversity, opportunity and environmental quality to make better places to live for everyone. Planners are often thwarted in this effort by politicians and developers who choose not to use their influence to promote community values over profit and expedience. First, let's distinguish between "planning" and "design." Planning takes into account a wide range of factors including social conditions, demographics, environmental impacts, the synergistic effects of a mix of uses, infrastructure, externalities, and on and on. Design is far more limited than that. (Architects often market themselves as "planners." Don't fall for it.) Design is very important and should be part of all good planning, but it is only one part of real town planning. If some of the products of good design - Kentlands, Seaside - turn out to appeal to a well-healed clientele, that is because their aesthetics are good and valued by Mary Kane has a point, but so does Chris Leinberger. As someone who has worked in and around the planning profession for nigh on to 30 years (gulp), my main beef with this story is the headline. It says – or means to imply – that urban planning is elitist. GOOD urban planning is not; it attempts to promote equity, diversity, opportunity and environmental quality to make better places to live for everyone. Planners are often thwarted in this effort by politicians and developers who choose not to use their influence to promote community values over profit and expedience.

First, let’s distinguish between "planning" and "design." Planning takes into account a wide range of factors including social conditions, demographics, environmental impacts, the synergistic effects of a mix of uses, infrastructure, externalities, and on and on. Design is far more limited than that. (Architects often market themselves as "planners." Don’t fall for it.) Design is very important and should be part of all good planning, but it is only one part of real town planning. If some of the products of good design – Kentlands, Seaside – turn out to appeal to a well-healed clientele, that is because their aesthetics are good and valued by

]]>