Talk:Urban planning

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Architecture (Rated Start-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Urban studies and planning (Rated Start-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Urban studies and planning, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Urban studies and planning on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Of Rural Planning[edit]

The process of planning for settlements (land use, environment, transport, etc) includes rural areas. Urban planning is performed at all scales and geographic locales (rather urban, sub-urban and rural). There are numerous synonyms which refer to the same set of professional practices. These have at various times included: urban, regional, town, spatial, rural, city, county, development, land use or some combination of these. (EI Urban and Regional Planning, Town Planning, Regional and Rural Planning, Township Planning etc.) The focus is on the primary stakeholder that the urban planner as a professional is practicing with. This is not unlike the numerous professional specialties of Medicine, Engineering, or Law. Several countries even specify in law the related nature of urban and rural spaces and the public necessity for planning for these spaces. For example, New Zealand has enacted the Urban and Rural Planning Act of 2000. There are numerous sources and I would summarize by suggesting that interested readers look through works like Becoming an Urban Planner: A Guide to Careers in Planning and Urban Design by Bayer, Frank and Valerius which discusses what urban planning is, what urban planners do and where urban planning occurs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Randomeditor1000 (talkcontribs) 04:40, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Your citation does not provide an actual definition of Urban Planning. Urban Planners are likely to also be involved in rural and regional planning but that does not mean the task of rural planning is a synonym of regional or rural. The fact that there is a "Urban and Rural Planning Act" means those two terms are distinct. Every reference to planning I can find makes a clear distinction between urban, rural and regional planning, see below for well cited references make the distinction clear.

As I've said before urban and rural are antonyms:
Urban - in, relating to, or characteristic of a town or city.
Rural - in, relating to, or characteristic of the countryside rather than the town.

If you wish to make the claim that urban and rural planning are synonymous than please provide a well cited reference and quote the relevant text.

Newman, Peter, and Andy Thornley. Urban planning in Europe: International competition, national systems, and planning projects. Psychology Press, 1996. "Urban planning is the focus of our attention and so other dimensions of planning are not covered, for example rural planning or regional planning which may be influenced by different factors..."

Allen, Adriana. "Environmental planning and management of the peri-urban interface: perspectives on an emerging field." Environment and urbanization 15.1 (2003): 135-148. "Environmental planning and management of peri-urban areas is informed by three distinctive fields, namely rural, regional and urban planning..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neilireson (talkcontribs) 12:13, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Neilireson, topically you are incorrect. Urban Planning does not have to be a synonym of any other type of adjective - planning to be factual. Rather the profession of urban planning includes planning for land use, infrastructure, water resources, etc etc at all scales, topologies and settlement locations. For that reason rural planning is a type of urban planning because it deals with land use and development in rural settings. While Dr. Allen is a professor of Urban Planning at University College London, they are no more the expert on the topology of the profession then they are of any other profession. It is opinion and not one endorsed by the profession at large.
From the book cited by Randomeditor1000:
"Urban Planners work in all kinds of cities- from large cities with million of residents to small rural hamlets with fewer than a hundred homes. In addition, whether a planner works for an individual city, for a regional planning agency or for a private client, planners are always thinking about the connections between the place where they focus their work and other places beyond those borders."
The American Planning Association has had a specialty group since 1979 that focuses on "small town and rural planning" at The American Planning Association is the professional organization/association for which urban planners belong to in the United States and even some practicing in other countries. Blanksamurai (talk) 20:41, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Article Evaluation[edit]

Some suggestions for improving this article are:

The third paragraph (section) talks about the sub-fields of urban planning. I feel that parks and recreation can be added to that list. I found online the salary of urban planners and think it would be good to add that to the urban planners section to inform people what they make if they are interested in this profession. i am confused on the theories section of the article. I think if they are going to make it "theories" instead of "theory" then we need to find more theories to make it more than one for that section or just get rid of the section as a whole. I also think you could add paragraphs explaining a few of the subsections of urban planning such as parks and recreation or public welfare because to be honest i don't know the details of public welfare and it's good to make sure everyone knows what these parts of urban planning are. I personally would not add those sections though until i got feedback on these ideas from others because I want to make sure others agree or disagree.

Kaleighp (talk) 15:08, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Inclusion of salary is not appropriate. For one, planning is a discipline practiced worldwide and wages vary substantially between countries, within countries (for instance rural shires versus metro areas) and depending on your employer (government versus private firm versus sole trader). Rund717 (talk) 12:13, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Article Evaluation – Urban Planning[edit]

Stylistic suggestions:

I first noticed some issues with writing style that I think should be changed. First, the phrase, “it concerns itself with…” in the introductory section should be changed. Because the noun “urban planning” is non-human and non-living, it cannot do anything or “concern itself” with anything. This should be changed to something along the lines of, “Urban planners in the field are concerned with…”

In the history section, the phrase “had grown” should be cut out and replaced with “grew.” This is simply a passive voice issue. The second half of that sentence should be a new sentence and reworded to read “The pace and style of this industrial construction was largely dictated by the concerns of private business.”

In the technical aspects section, the list of “urban planning techniques” needs to be changed up to allow for parallel structure. This sentence should be changed to, “Urban planning includes techniques such as: predicting population growth, zoning, geographic mapping and analysis, analyzing park space, surveying the water supply, identifying transportation patterns, recognizing food supply demands, allocating healthcare and social services, and analyzing the impact of land use.”

Substantive suggestions:

The history section here needs to be vastly improved. I realize there is a separate article for the history of urban planning, but this section definitely needs a much better summary of that history article. The section here only focuses on the impact that industrialization had on urban planning and completely ignores the fact that history is a continuous, chronological record.

The very last section of this article needs to be changed up a little as well. An explanation of why urban planners “could be considered green collar workers” needs to be included.

User:Jam3jr (talk) 16:27, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello User:Jam3jr,
Some general responses about your review of the article. The 'technical aspects' of urban planning are features/characteristics that are part of the professional practice. They are not techniques or practices per se. The history of urban planning as a separate profession or discipline is accurately summarized as the earliest professionals in known history to be paid and recognized in the field were during the industrialization of the United Kingdom in the early 20th century. As a result the summary paragraph focuses on the history of the profession rather than the practice since these are nearly always synonymous of each other. Finally, proper terminology should refer to urban planning the practice. Which is separate from the urban planners article following similar practice by other professions. Blanksamurai (talk) 19:52, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

This article was really butchered. It should not have been moved to a new title in 2015, that really made a mess of the page history. Citobun (talk) 15:21, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

It was extremely long, and, at the point that it was divided into subtopics included such intriguing information as latrine and waste-water planning. It needed to be broken up badly because it had devolved into less notable nuances about history, culture and non-fact based arguments. But yes, the page history is no longer whole. Blanksamurai (talk) 20:45, 16 August 2016 (UTC)