Friday, 17 April 2015

Topic 6A: Cities of Tomorrow – the origins of Urban Planning

Qihui (Peter) Wang

A Garden City ideal could never be built by throwing the existing upside element in cities, but by bottom up generation and mix use neighbourhoods. The garden is defied as a city that it once built, nobody would ever live in his or her original place anymore and come to it instead. The construction of garden city is built on the basic need of human being, from basic physical need to esteem needs.

Likewise, the design of Canberra ought to have elements representing Australia, including culture, politics, economics, etc. However, if we look back the current state of Canberra, which is the capital city of Australia, it’s not as famous as other cities in the Australia, like Melbourne Sydney and Brisbane. If we reflect on the design process, it selected important elements, which represents Australia in other cities and try to thrown them is a small town. The result is obvious, from the perspective of attracting people live their, it failed.

The question is why did it failed, the city had all the elements it needs to build a perfect that represents Australia. A very similar question could be asked, why did Garden city (a city with all the ideal elements of human being want) never could be constructed? Or in other words, why there are so many people (Thomas Horsfall, John Nettlefold,) try to build a city according to the Garden City Ideology but problems keep coming?

There are also cities was build according to the political and economical need of the country which regenerated nowadays, these cities are facing problems of lack of high quality space. (Vasiljeva,2013) in order to do so, cooperation with other discipline is require such as landscape architecture.  The case of exploring topics of human need in urban environment in Olaine, which aim to improve the quality of recreation areas, proves that systemic approach is more efficient in planning. This is not limited in landscape but architecture as well.  Bristol (2008) addressed the responsibilities that architects has to the basic human needs of society by providing shelter, healthy workplace and a liveable city by using development working examples of communities in China and Southeast Asia.


Planners’ epistemology play an important role in how they design cities, and it’s preconceived with marginal reductionism. According to Eagleton (1991), the key to claim something is ideological is to prove that it had been orientated with pre-occupied ideas.

Take a closer look at how Canberra was designed, the designer took out elements from different cities which represents Australia and thrown into it. The understanding is purely based on marginal reductionism, the approach to understand things is by breaking it to its smallest components. Marginal reductionism is the foundation of the modern science, which provides human being with the advantages of technical breakthrough.

However, planner ought to identify, understand and treat cities as problems of organized complexities instead of problems of simplicity (Jacobs, 1961). Cities are more than just a collection of two-variable questions. A systematic approach should be adopted in order to understand cities. Reynolds (1991) examines how transportation reshaping the cities to meet the needs of human being in a background of large scale urban sprawl in Australia. Approach public transportation systematically becomes the new focus of town planners.


de Haan, F et al (2013) address societal systems are systems which evolved to meet the societal needs by using established social psychological framework of societal needs is developed. The approach has a more comprehensive and systematic description of societal system and ‘intrinsic facility to address matters like sustainability and liveability’. The systematic approach allows planners think about cities as a whole and understand the community more comprehensively.


Additionally, instead of over-focusing on why current cities succussed, it’s more important to understand what the users, people living in the city, really needs and integrated into the plan. For that purpose, bottom-up planning approach would be more user-friendly and effective in promoting walkability and encouraging mix used of streets. On the other hand, a top-down approach is more suitable at large scale regeneration.  

For instance, temporary parking at Sunday streets meets the needs of  outdoor recreation of people living in high density urban areas. A wide range of survey was conducted in San Francisco which found a strong positive correlation between the concentration of residential parks and the probability of participation at Sunday Street. The same result also was found in the Spanish and Chinese community.


Bibliography:


de Haan, F. J., Ferguson, B. C., Adamowicz, R. C., Johnstone, P., Brown, R. R., & Wong, T. H. (2014). The needs of society: A new understanding of transitions, sustainability and liveability.Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 85121-132. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2013.09.005

Human needs in urban public spaces : improving the quality of recrea on areas in Olaine, Latvia. (2013).

Architecture and shelter : the roles and responsibilities of architects in meeting basic needs. (2008).

Reynolds, M. (1991). Urban Sprawl--The Need for Reform. Social Alternatives, 10(2), 23-24.

Eagleton, T. (2014). Ideology. [electronic resource]. Hoboken : Taylor and Francis, 2014.

Jacobs, Jane. 1961. The death and life of great American cities. New York: Random House.


No comments:

Post a Comment