كتاب التخطيط الحضري والإقليمي Urban and Regional Planning
اخر تحديث :
كتاب التخطيط الحضري والإقليمي Urban and Regional Planning
كتاب التخطيط الحضري والإقليمي Urban and Regional Planning ، استكمالا لسلسلة تحميل كتب جغرافية pdf نقدم لكم في هذه المقالة كتاب التخطيط الحضري والإقليمي Urban and Regional Planning من تأليف Peter Hall and Mark Tewdwr-Jones.
Introduction Book Urban and Regional Planning
Planning, planners and plans
Planning, the subject matter of this book, is an extremely ambiguous and diffi cult word to defi ne. Planners of all kinds think that they know what it means; it refers to the work they do. The diffi culty is that they do all sorts of different things, and so they mean different things by the word; planning seems to be all things to all people. We need to start by defi ning what exactly we are discussing.
The reference in the dictionary gives one clue to the confusion. Whether you go to the Oxford English Dictionary or the American Webster, there you fi nd that the noun ‘plan’ and the verb ‘to plan’ have several distinct meanings. In particular, the noun can either mean ‘a physical representation of something’ – as for instance a drawing or a map; or it can mean ‘a method for doing something’; or ‘an orderly arrangement of parts of an objective’. The fi rst meaning, in particular, is quite different from the others: when we talk about a street ‘plan’ of London or New York, we mean something quite different from when we talk about our ‘plan’ to visit London or New York next year. But there is one defi nition that combines the others and blurs the distinction, as when we talk about a ‘plan’ for a new building. This is simultaneously a physical design of that building as it is intended to be, and a guide to realizing our intention to build it. And it is here that the real ambiguity arises.
The seers: pioneer thinkers in urban planning
The delay in the recognition and acceptance of the individuals’ early visionary ideas is very important. Some of these ideas were more or less fully developed by the end of the nineteenth century, and a large part were known to the interested public by the end of the First World War. Yet with the exception of some small-scale experiments up to 1939, nearly all the infl uence on practical policy and design has come since 1945. One obvious peril in this is that no matter how topical and how appropriate these thinkers were in analysing the problems of their own age, their remedies might be at least partially outdated by the time they came to be taken seriously. We shall need to judge for ourselves how serious this has been.
It is useful to divide the thinkers into two groups: the Anglo-American group and the Continental European group. The basis of the distinction here is more than one of convenience. Basically the background of the two groups of thinkers has been quite different. We already saw in Chapter 2 that in England and Wales (Scotland in this respect has been rather more like the European continent), cities began to spread out after about 1860: first the middle class and then (especially with the growth of public housing after the First World War) the working class began to move out of the congested inner rings of cities into single-family homes with individual gardens, built at densities of 10 or 12 houses to the acre. Exactly the same process occurred, from about the same time, in most American cities, though in some cases the process was delayed by the great wave of arrivals of national groups (such as Italians, Greeks, Russians, Poles, and Jews from these last two countries) between 1880 and 1910; they crowded together in ethnic ghettos in the inner areas of cities like New York, Boston or Chicago, and took some time to join the general outward movement. Nevertheless, by the 1920s and 1930s there was a rapid growth of single-family housing around all American cities, served by public transport and then, increasingly, by the private car. This was a tradition that, by and large, writers and thinkers in both Britain and the United States accepted as the starting point.
Planning for cities and city regions since 1945
At the end of Chapter 4 we summarized some of the chief features of the elaborate planning system set up in Britain just after the Second World War. We saw that, essentially, the system was designed for an economy where the bulk of urban development and redevelopment would be carried out by public agencies – a far cry indeed from the actual world of the twenty-fi rst century. We saw too that an essential function of the system was to control and regulate the pace and direction of change – social, economic and physical.It was assumed that control of change was both feasible and desirable: feasible, because the pace of population growth and of economic development was expected to be slow, and also because new and effective powers would be taken to control the regional balance of new industrial employment; desirable, because decision-makers generally shared the Barlow hypothesis that uncontrolled change before the war had produced undesirable results. Furthermore we noticed that the administrative responsibility for operating the new system was lodged not in central government but in the existing units of local government, with only a degree of central monitoring. The system thus created was from the beginning more powerful on its negative side than on the side of positive initiative.
These features were of course interrelated. Because the pace of change was expected to be slow, it seemed possible to control it. Because the positive role in development would be taken by public agencies, the remaining negative powers could safely be vested in the local authorities. The danger was that if any one of the basic assumptions proved wrong, the logical interrelationships would also go wrong. And in fact the postwar reality proved very different from the assumptions of those who created the planning system between 1945 and 1952.