THE HISTORY
The history of Urban Planning was first stated way back to nearly 6000 years ago where the civilizations of the Mediterranean Sea begin to organize their urban life in ziggurats, which function as temple and also as observation area. The history then followed by the urban development in Chinese ancient cities, Greek, Roman, the Dark Ages, medieval to the most urban planning phenomenon in the modern era. Each of the events and places in history of the urban development could tells us specific characteristic of the systematic urban forms at that time. But it is not only the physical form of urban structure that this history describe, we can also draw many information about economic condition, political, and even social-cultural values during that certain period.
It is always interesting to find out everything that occurs in our present time could (probably) be related to the prior conditions in the past. Interesting in a sense that all the information written in the history always open up to many possibilities for further reference study.
Historically talking, time also tells us that the scientific revolution era contributes to many changes in social issues and off course the urban planning development. The industrialization as a result of scientific inventions gave lots of work field and the social order began to change. People’s hope for a better living environment began to rise. More systematic infrastructures like sanitary also well implemented on this era. People have many choices in terms of works, lifestyle as well as living environments than ever before. This momentum then marked as a starting point to the practice of modern urban planning later on.
There’s this assumption that the history is repeating in somewhat way. We can see it in a way that the industrialization era is (again) taking part in the Chinese urban contemporary development especially when the open door policy in 1978 was activated. Many investors eagerly put their money to this country which has led to the booming industries, properties, and puts China into one of the most active in the development of the economic sector.
All these history things lead to the significance importance of what this time and momentum issue could contributes to a better condition (living environment in this case) in the future. And when it comes to the planning and even technical design level, this time plays major roles as well as the space –that contains the physical condition- itself, which probably (most of) architects, urban designers and planners themselves sometimes forgot to think it consideringly.
PLANNING AS A PROCESS
As it is an activity of thinking, visioning, directing, managing, conserving, producing to implementing, the domain of the urban planning itself relates to many tangible (e.g physical infrastructures) and intangible aspects (e.g socio-economic issues, political issues, human and cultural values, time etc). The word visioning describes that this process is again contained in the time dimension. It is always future oriented, yet the whole process should consider every aspect in the current time. The uncertainties then emerge as this visioning proceeds along the process. So how can we make a good decision on the planning process with all these uncertainties? The rationalities behind the process is a huge question mark that makes the whole process is a wicked problems. Because there’s this uncertainty, there is no right or wrong answer, no definite formula, unlimited ideas and alternatives and so on. There is one thing that we can do though. The typical planning process which starts from identifying the problems, collect & analyse data, develop goals & objectives to Implementation & monitoring could help us to perceive a comprehensive and broader perspective on what aspects that we need to accomodates, and in the end resulted in a clear vision as well as minimizing the effects of the uncertainties. And again, learning from history will probably be a good reference.
Though Ripley’s study about visioning explained that the vision concept has always been constant since the biblical time-that therefore need to be examined- the problems which commonly exist in the planning practice problems extend beyond that. It is the process that relates to various aspect and its activities that extend from the local city scale to even global scale which makes it ends up in a complex relation that ironically some development actors use it as a tool against the idealism way of planner thinking. It is, sometimes the evangelist idea of vision tends to be too utopist that for some private and government actors think it too impossible to even understand it. And yes, the planning itself surely has a dark side untill now, as there were the anti planning thinking back in 1980s. From socialist resistance, the planning causes inequalities, from the academic-profession discourses as McLaughlin stated that the planning courses is just a form of indoctrination into a planning profession rather than a critical reflection on the needs of people and cities (Allmendinger, 2001). But apart of all that, the planning process should be seen and considered as one hollistic approach to get the most possible way -if not the best- in making decision, solutions, alternative ideas through comprehensive study to solve the problems for the sake of the good public realm.
Trying to reflect all these lesson-learn here to the condition in my country Indonesia –specifically talking the Jakarta city-, the vast urban development in the country which commonly see in the form of superblock typology and off course new town development has somehow lead to an argument that there is some missing link, missing communication among development actors. This concept of superblock as a city within a city brings positive effects in the efficiency of mobility (though it’s still need continous evaluation), but on the other hand, I think the economic condition of the people –mostly low income people- has not been well prepared yet. This fast urbanization has driven out the low income people away from the city center. The (unprepared) transport infrastructure which the government planned hardly accomodates the people need. Developers keep busying themselves on getting the money. The problem could probably relies on the big global agenda. A clear and bold development direction from the central government will helps alot on the first major step on creating good communication among actors towards the best quality of life.
BIBLIOGRAPHY :
Allmendinger, P. (2001). Planning in postmodern times. The RTPI library series. London: Routledge.
Robert Shipley (2000). The origin and development of vision and visioning in planning. International Planning Studies, 5(2), 225-236. Retrieved September 10, 2008, from ABI/INFORM Global database
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Terkadang saya tidak tahu apa yang saya bicarakan.... (-___-)
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar