The Master Plan

Master plans where the topic of this weeks reading. The chapter was titled The Master Plan, an Impermanent Constitution and was written by Charles M Haar. Harr explains that the concept of the master plan has no universal meaning and that there is no one way to create them. They do, however, all share a core common meaning and are used widely, not just in the planning profession.

This common meaning is evident in the variety of ways that master plans are used by planners. First, they act as a source of information. The initial step of formulating a plan is to collect information on the current condition of a planning object (e.g. a town centre). This information provides the foundation for every plan and, even if the plan is not completed, can be a useful reference for future projects. Second, a master plan provides a program for correction. It does this by identifying the deficiencies of a place and then suggesting ways in which it can be improved. Third, they give an estimate of the future. The goals of a plan are based on estimates of growth and, therefore, give insight into possible timeframes of development. Fourth, master plans are an indicator of goals as they seek to articulate the wants and needs of particular communities. Fifth, they offer a technique for coordination. As there are many different actors in the planning environment, the master plan is useful in coordinating concurrent activities. Finally, they have the capacity to stimulate the responsibility and interest of the public. Because master plans require the participation of communities, they serve as line communication between the public and planning professionals.

Although master plans are not usually statutory documents, it is clear from the above description, they are powerful planning tools. For me their most important quality seems to be the ability to present a vision for the future. By clearly defining and illustrating a concept of what-could-be, the master plan can effectively guide the development of cities.

Artists impression of what Section 63 in Canberra's CBA could look like. Shows the possibilities of what could be achieved by a master plan (Source: http://www.northcanberra.org.au)

Multiculturalism and Planning

This week’s reading was Pluralistic Planning for Multicultural Cities by Mohammad A. Qadeer.  It highlighted the significant influence of multiculturalism on the field of urban planning. In this essay, Qadeer defines multiculturalism as a public philosophy that “… acknowledges racial and cultural differences in a society and encourages their sustenance and expression as constituent elements of a national social order.”  The author views the fundamental effect of this philosophy to be the need for pluralistic planning which aims to achieve equal fulfillment of the needs and wants of diverse groups of people.

Qadeer describes the influence of multiculturalism as occurring in two ways.  First, by creating an avenue for critical analysis in terms of whether the polices and standards of planning are aligned with broader social values and public goals.  Second, by forcing recognition of ethnic spatial concentrations in the form of neighborhoods and enclaves.  These physical aspects contribute to the structure of whole cities and influence social policies that seek to strike a balance between integration and difference.

Although the article focuses on the experience of multiculturalism in Canada, the points discussed certainly apply to other planning contexts.  Australia, for example, is a multicultural society in many respects.  In many of our major settlements, historically and at present, ethnically focused neighborhood and enclaves are observable.  Also, the development of institutions and services in response to immigration is certainly evident. A key point made by Qadeer is the distinction between “old” and “new” multiculturalism.  The key difference being that multiculturalism today is reinforced by public policy.  This has been re-affirmed in Australia this year with the release of Chris Bowen’s The People of Australia- Australia’s Multicultural Policy. 

Another point made by Qadeer are the issues relating to the housing market in response to multiculturalism. They involve discrimination of ethnic groups in accessing housing and the particular housing types preferred by these groups. As far as I’m aware, these issues do not appear to be having a major impact on the Australian housing market. By this I mean, I’ve never heard of residential develops being ethnically specific, at least not explicitly. I would not be surprised, however, to hear about discrimination occurring in the rental market though. Any opinions/info on this issue in Australia would be appreciated. 

Jane Jacobs and New Urbanism

Jane Jacob’s article Downtown is for People (1958) originally published in The Exploding Metropolis contains the seminal ideas of her influential work. The article gave Jacob’s her big break as a journalist and allowed her to expand her message into the famous book The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Essentially it was a strong critique on the urban renewal projects of the 1950’s and challenged the fundamental theories and practices of the planning profession.

I found the ideas expressed in this article to be very refreshing after weeks of studying modernist planning theory. No doubt this is how many people felt and why her book garnered such immediate acclaim when it was first published in 1961. While I do agree to some degree with critic’s such as Lewis Mumford, who was appalled at Jacob’s savage denunciation of Ebenezer Howards Garden City Movement, it seems that many aspects of modernist thought did not give much consideration important things like the “pedestrian level”. I found the idea of the “two shift city” particularly interesting- a healthy and vibrant community must be active in the night as well as in the day.

Jacob’s ideas were very influential in planning and in particular on the development of New Urbanism, of which my last blog touched on briefly. For me the fact of Jacob’s influence is pertinent to the discussion concerning the validity of the field of planning. In a sense, Jacob’s was an anti-planner yet she contributed so significantly to the theory and practice of the profession. It is interesting to consider whether this detracts from the validity of her ideas or the validity of the planning profession in general.

Jane Jacobs (Source: http://bss.sfsu.edu/pamuk/urban/)