Misplaced Pages

Addressing considered a part of urban planning?

Mention if house addressing and street numbering have ever been considered a part of urban planning, and why not. Give a link to http://en.wikipedia.org/House_numbering

Planners get tasked to manage address systems, but it's not an essential element of "urban planning" by any stretch. In my personal experience, the post office and emergency management are leaders in addressing, with planners coordinating. --JC Shepard 03:22, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

OK, added Urban_planning#Addressing. Jidanni 10:50, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Misc

I'm embarking on a major overhaul of this page. Much of the information is incomplete, and too narrowly focused on a) physical planning and b) American planning. Townsnda 08:50, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

As a long-time lurker, longer-time urban planner, I like the feel of this article; however, it is high on fluff and low on substance. There is enough controversy within the profession itself regarding what "urban planning" is to make the topic difficult. See, e.g., Myers, D. and T. Banerjee (2005) "Longer View: Toward Greater Heights for Planning: Reconciling the Differences between Profession, Practice, and Academic Field," Journal of the American Planning Association. 71(2): 121-129, which I myself don't personally agree with, yet presents a strong argument. This would be a better entry sticking to description and leaving original opinions to the journals. (See Misplaced Pages:No original research). JC Shepard 21:57, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

On the planning and transportation topic, none mentioned motorcycles. Surely they work well on traffic, and traffic jams are reduced in cities where there is a high percentage of motorcycle riders, and they are familiar to us for over a century. But this contributor doesnt know the numbers. Anybody? Mauricio Manco ( oitoparafusos@hotmail.com )

Removals

I removed this. It isn't anywhere close to NPOV. Andy Shepard

Many urban areas show little sign of ever having being planned in any coherent or socially-aware way. Buildings and spaces may reflect the different priorities of a different era, or simply demonstrate an undue (anti-social or environmentally-insensitive) emphasis on the priorities of the organisation or individual that paid for their construction. Left-over parts of a town or city that appear to serve no particular purpose have been labelled by the pejorative acronym "SLOAP" meaning Space Left Over After Planning. Unfortunately such spaces are all too common, particularly in suburban areas, and planners, businesses, politicians, land agents and communities all have a duty to consider how these flaws in the urban fabric might be repaired.

Redlinks

In adding a paragraph on urban planning to Mitigation of global warming, I discovered that these are all redlinks. Are there articles they should redirect to? Otherwise we should create the articles.

• private vehicle,
• medium-density,
• mixed-use fixed
• town center
• transport node - List_of_transport_topics#Nodes is the most relevant I could find, but I think it deserves an article.

--Singkong2005 13:35, 27 May 2006 (UTC)reallyy nowww?

• FIXED Transport Nodes now redirects to somewhere logical
• FIXED Town center redirects to Town CenTRE
• ????? I suppose medium density should goto to 'Development Density' but no such page exists

Mixed use is a nice article... i hadn't seen it before :) Bjrobinson 22:46, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

reversion 6/6/6

Reverted article back form this: . Although quite well written and relatively interesting it added whay too mush to the opening section, was in a strange format, appeared to be the (very intelligent) personal veiws of the author, looked silly, was unnesscarily long, was unsourced.Bjrobinson

Reinsertion of "Comeback Cities"

discussion started at User talk:EurekaLott:

Hi EurekaLott. You removed a book reference in the article on Urban planning. It is a very classic and important book for the topic, especially on revival of extant urban areas, so I put it under a general bibliography. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 12:56, 15 September 2006 (UTC) (talk)

I never heard of it either... amazon sales rank of #164,382 and using the "what people bought after vieing this page thingy" i reckon only 14 people have ever bought it. Bjrobinson 14:48, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Since the book was added to the Notes section, I removed the General bibliography section as redundant. Hope that works for everybody. - EurekaLott 03:46, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, it works for now. Looking up a scholarly book on Amazon to see how important it is --- that's not a good method. Useful for popular fiction, etc. Some of the best texts and scholarly books have very few sales on Amazon but are highly quoted and respected. One should have qualitatively looked it up using Google. I also had included a Business Week review of the book. And a lot more than "14" people bought it since it is used in university courses. Best Regards. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 14:59, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Needless to say, of course, it has been included as part of the canon of the American Planning Association, the professional society for urban planners in America. Quoting from the American Planning Assocation synopsis:

In COMEBACK CITIES, Paul Grogan and Tony Proscio show how innovative, pragmatic tactics for easing the nation’s urban ills have produced results beyond anyone’s expectations.

Ineffective efforts by big government and business working independently have given way to public-private partnerships and grassroots nonprofit organizations that are willing to experiment to solve urban problems. Pragmatism, not dogma, has produced the charter schools movement and a new law enforcement focus on “quality of life” issues. A new breed of big city mayors has welcomed business back into the city, demanded results and performance from city agencies, downplayed divisive racial politics, and cracked down on symptoms of social disorder. As a consequence, America’s inner cities are becoming vital communities once again.

Although there is still much to be done, Grogan and Proscio base their optimism on several trends that could boost the impact of grassroots community development. For example, ample access to capital and credit, reductions in violent crime, and much-needed overhauls of public housing, welfare, and public schools all are harbingers of urban revival.

Ron Brownstein of the Los Angeles Times has written that this book is "arguably the most important book about cities in a generation."

Paul Grogan was a professor at Harvard Business School and also an administrator. For a bio, see .

And here are some significant reviews of the book. ... from the New York Times to the journal "Urban Affairs".

--- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 15:14, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

ok. As always we all manage to make it all right :) This page is #1 on a goolg serch now though so we do need to keep it 'tight'. Bjrobinson 18:59, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

reconstruction

Whatever the motives... this section is good? The pictures are welcome too, nice one of the Kabul Masterplan. Bjrobinson 11:54, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not so sure it's an entirely positive addition. This section, ARCADD, Inc., City of Light Development, Hisham N. Ashkouri, and most of the contributions of User:Arcaddmarketing appear to be one big self-promotion effort. - EurekaLott 12:35, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Can't deny that... the username even includes 'marketing'. Ill go with the consensus, but currently i think its done sensitively. The pictures are also useful, we could do with a GNU licensed masterplan pic for other planing related articals Bjrobinson 21:07, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

"Non-planning"

I think this article could deal with the examples of laissez-faire or non-existent zoning, whioch occurs in both developed and developing countries (e.g. Houston, Texas) and its effects. Grant65 | Talk 12:13, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

a quick glance into google maps will reveal, that there is no such thing as non-planning either in the usa or, as far as i know, in any other developped country. apart from the usual urban sprawl, houston looks well planned to me. one could certainly look up the effects of non-planning in places like kathmandu or bogota. Sundar1 12:11, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

"Looks well-planned" is not the same thing as planned. The article on Houston says:

Houston is the largest city in the United States without zoning laws, and so has grown in a different manner. Rather than a single "downtown" as the center of the city's employment, five additional business districts have grown throughout the city: Uptown, Texas Medical Center, Greenway Plaza, Westchase, and Greenspoint.

Is there a comparable examples of a large city without zoning in the developed world? Grant | Talk 15:32, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

The concern over the lack of public planning of Houston remains a concern internally. There have been I think 4 episodic attempts to apply statutorily-enabled zoning since the early 1900s, but all of these attempts were defeated by pro-growth interests in the area. The City of Houston does keep a minimal set of written ordinances, something like a form-based code, related to development in the city and its extraterritorial jurisdictional area. But it tends to control development through the deployment of public infrastructure primarily, and via subdivision regulations secondarily. There is no general or comprehensive plan map or set of declared public goals around which to gain consensus. The city, and the counties that contain it, are subject at times to titanic struggles over the future direction of growth and development which make and break personal and corporate fortunes and shift political power. The classic conflicts between social equity, environmental protection and economic development are very active here but generally less than perceptible to the public. Paulsuckow (talk) 00:16, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Cells

What is this 'cells' business mentioned in the article under aesthetics? Honestly never heard of them except in passing reference to new towns. Does this paragraph need to be there? Bjrobinson 15:25, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok im going to remove this then :) Bjrobinson 13:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Urban history

FYI, I created a category called Category:Urban history that is collecting the history of cities. - Freechild 02:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Seminal Books section

This section makes me very nervous... anyone have a proper source to justify this list? Bjrobinson 10:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree. And how can the Kerb 15 publication...released April 2007...be a seminal work? Maybe use the economics page as a model? Call it study resources or further reading. Matt Kuzmatt9 13:45, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Transport

This section is of high importance, makes many assertions, yet provides few, if any, sources. There are more ways of calculating density than Floor Area Ratio, and this section should acknowledge this, as well as providing comprehensive links to sources for all figures etc.Eyedubya 11:40, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

There is a severe issue with the graph provided that compares a city's size to the amount of gasoline the people use. The units in which the gasoline is measured in is not given, so is it litres? gallons? millilitres? etc. 17:41:40, 20 March 2011 (ET) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.237.251.98 (talk)

Spam removal

It is not acceptable in WP to place references to ones own work. if it is important, someone else will do so, See WP:COI. The ones added by Mesmith9 to his own work have been removed, and also the links added by an anon. apparently working on behalf of clients. DGG (talk) 02:27, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it fair to say their is a gradual decline in quality on this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bjrobinson (talk • contribs) 23:55, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

is there other stuff to be removed? DGG (talk) 08:29, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

External links

• Urban Utopias — A virtual exhibition on urban utopias thoughout ages —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.215.9.26 (talk) 18:30, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
• Urban Attributes — A glossary of urban terms that have served to describe recent urban phenomena —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacmaes (talk • contribs) 09:25, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
• Cyburbia — Community for Urban Planners
• Planetizen — Network for Urban Planning, Design and Development
• PlanningNewsVote (PNV) — News website for planning by planners
• The Next American City — a not-for-profit organization founded by a new generation of urban thinkers and leaders to explore the transformation of America’s cities and suburbs —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smalltownfires (talk • contribs) 01:22, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
• NewUrbanNews — News website for New Urbanism —Preceding unsigned comment added by Certified planner (talk • contribs) 05:04, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

The last one seems ok but the rest seem to fail WP:EL, namely:

• Links to search engine and aggregated results pages.
• Links to social networking sites (such as MySpace), discussion forums/groups (such as Yahoo! Groups) or USENET.

--NeilN 05:11, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

The last one would probably be better if added to the New urbanism article instead of this one. If any of these are to be added back to the article, Planetizen would probably be the most appropriate. It's become the premier portal for urban planning issues, and among other things, serves as a human-edited aggregator for planning news. - EurekaLott (talk) 05:43, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

*Cyburbia is almost certainly the largest and most 'reliable' urban planning community on the net with very in depth discussion carried out in a pretty professional manner, having been around since the 90's. U actually use Cyburbia for proper advice about proper things. It should not be removed.

*Planetizen is considered fairly reliable amongst collegues.

*Planningnewsvote is an RSS feed type thing? Never heard of it. Lots of non related stuff on it, doenst seem useful to have it here

*New Very 'Americocentric', but a professional 'journal' of sorts

*Comment. The key is to keep this free of specific interest sites and pressure groups. Bjrobinson (talk) 12:00, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Who got rid of all of these? We need links to American Planning Assoc and Royal Town Planning Institute at the very least too. Bjrobinson (talk) 12:15, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't think we should be adding links to the APA or RTPI, because people would then want to add other national organizations like the Canadian Institute of Planners, the New Zealand Planning Institute, the Malaysian Institute of Planners, and so on. - EurekaLott (talk) 16:39, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello? Anyone? I get the feeling that if I was the guy from "the other planning Web site", the links would be restored like that (snaps fingers). Elmwood (talk) 01:10, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

But you kept a link to the planning portion of the ODP, which you happen to maintain. This could be seen as a conflict of interest; I know when I've done anything that is even barely perceived as such, I'm subject to The Wrath of the Administrators. Elmwood (talk) 20:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

But, this is ENG WP therefore APA and RTPI should be included as the most relevent organisations to the subject. Canadian PA were included as their definition was useful and was used in the intro. Why not add Aus and NZ ones to prevent argument? 5 links to the key Planning organisations of the main english speaking countries + 3 of the ones listed above is hardly too much to ask for a 'root' topic such as this which leads onto to many smaller topics. 8 In total is not too many. Bjrobinson (talk) 14:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes on the national ones just for equal treatment. New American City strikes me as an online magazine, and not a suitable link. DGG (talk) 01:30, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, the APA and RTPI have WP articles, but nothing yet for the PIA (Planning Institute of Australia) ... my view is that there should be articles on WP about such organisations, and the links to the pages on this page can be listed under 'See also' Eyedubya (talk) 13:26, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Planning Process

I have an article I have been working on about the comprehensive planning process. I think mentioning the process and adding a link to the article page in the Process section of this article may be a good idea, since the comprehensive planning process is a large part of urban planning. Str0426 (talk) 18:05, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

low quality references

I have removed some references to unauthoritative or local web sites that were used to satisfy fact tags; published RSs are needed. As they statements being documented are very general, it should be possible to find them in authoritative textbooks or the like. 09:34, 30 June 2008 (UTC)DGG (talk)

Hippodamus & Alexandria

While Hippodamus may be credited with developing urban planning, he could not have had anything to do with the design and construction of Alexandria as his life and Alexander were a century apart. The line referring to "Alexander commissioned him (Hippodamus) to lay out his new city of Alexandria" needs to be removed. Even in the history of Alexandria, Hippodamus is not mentioned... Stevenmitchell (talk) 17:09, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

New external link

I think this editor meant to propose this as a new external link, but made the error of embedding it into a discussion from January instead. I have moved her link down here in a new section for visibility. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 07:23, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

• Department of Urban and Regional Planning at University of Illinois —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lcurvey (talk • contribs) 17:22, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Second Paragraph?

What is the second paragraph intending to say? I'm looking at the ending: "varying upon from the interlectural strategic positioning from university to university." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.213.247.93 (talk) 18:14, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Image and new section

The image should be replaced by an image of low-rise buildings (eg as the new ecocities), ...

A new section is to be added at aspects of planning; called durability it should describe the USA neighborhoods (see image, text at white picket fence) which are despite their indurability being copied in China (eg Beijing), ...

Ref=Home (documentary)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.243.178.120 (talk) 07:30, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Sustainable development and sustainability?

I don't suppose the editors could reduce that to just "sustainable development". Seems to be redundant to me.--71.245.164.83 (talk) 03:25, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Links

where i can put some links in the article ? פארוק (talk) 20:14, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

I added the LibGuides link. You have to click on the blue tabs at the top of page to get all the resources, but they're both print and online and quite extensive. Flatterworld (talk) 05:50, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

New Lead Section

Here is a proposal for a new introductory section, as suggested by WP editors. I've tried to summarise the subject, replacing the previous one-word synonyms. I dont think either of the references currently used are appropriate, and the lead section should only include a general reference text, maybe Hopkins', Urban Development: The Logic Of Making Plans.
So, for instance:

Urban planning is a technical and political process concerned with the control of the use of land and design of the urban environment, including transportation networks, to guide and ensure the orderly development of settlements and communities. It concerns itself with research and analysis, strategic thinking, design, public consultation, policy recommendations, implementation and management.

A plan can take a variety of forms including: policy recommendations, community action plans, comprehensive plans, neighbourhood plans, regulatory and incentive strategies, or historic preservation plans. Planners are often also responsible for enforcing the chosen policies.

The modern origins of urban planning lie in the movement for urban reform that arose as a reaction against the disorder of the industrial city in the mid-19th century. Urban planning can include urban renewal, by adapting urban planning methods to existing cities suffering from decline. In the late-20th century the term sustainable development has come to represent an ideal outcome in the sum of all planning goals.

I'll leave it a week to see if there is any agreement. --Jim Douet (talk) 09:00, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Infrastructure planning

Should this redirect here? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:47, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

No infrastructure planning should be considered a sub-discipline. Technical urban planners work in infrastructure planning. They develop systemwide plans, create political consensus, arrange funding sources and write the scope of large complex projects (an example would be a development plan for a light rail line). They also analyze entire systems of public infrastructure and determine systemwide needs and maintenance. Civil engineers and electrical systems engineers play a very pivotal role in infrastructure planning as well and are traditionally considered the other major players in infrastructure planning as they pull projects into the other stages of program delivery. Infrastructure planning is also related to urban design and architecture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.24.181.239 (talk) 00:10, 14 September 2013 (UTC)