Urban
Planning 540:
PLANNING THEORY
Fall Semester, 2010
Final Study Guide
|
|
Last modified: December 13, 2016
Exam Logistics:
- in-class, during the last regular class session (Monday, December 13).
- The exam starts promptly at 11:10 am and ends at 12:30 pm. We will design the exam to be reasonably completed within 60 minutes, allowing you to extra time to proof-read and review your answers.
- Closed-book/closed-note (i.e., do not bring books or notes to class). You can write the answers to the exam on the exam copy itself (no need for blue books). You will only need to bring pens or pencils.
EXTRA OFFICE HOURS: In addition to my posted office hours, I will be available in my office the Friday before the exam (Dec. 10) from 10:00 am- 12:00 noon and from 1:00 - 3:00 pm to answer any questions. Feel free to come by individually or as a group for an informal discussion. No need to sign up -- just stop by anytime during that time.
Exam Logistics:
The exam will likely be a combination of some of the following elements:
- short answer (e.g., compare and contrast two ideas/terms in 1-2 paragraphs)
- short essay (e.g., 1-2 hand-written pages)
- matching ideas & arguments to schools/styles of planning (e.g., incrementalism; strategic planning; New Urbanism; communicative action; advocacy planning; etc.)
- matching major planning movements, events, ideas to their historical period (e.g., know the general time sequence of such events as: the Columbia Exposition vs. the Burnham Plan of Chicago; or the era of Robert Moses' major projects vs. Jane Jacobs' publication of The Death and Life of Great American Cities; etc.)
Here are some useful terms to know by the end of the semester.
Note regarding this study guide: This is NOT a complete list of terms, ideas, and questions that may be
on the exam, though it should provide a fairly good idea of what to expect.
Terms and Concepts
URBAN AND ECONOMIC PROCESSES
physical determinism
property contradiction
market failure
public goods
externalities
STYLES OF PLANNING
comprehensive planning
"rational model" of planning
incremental planning
advocacy planning
strategic planning
equity planning
communicative action planning
TYPOLOGIES OF CITIES AND URBANIZATION
city
metropolis
region
megalopolis
hinterland
suburb
technoburb
MOVEMENTS AND PROTOTYPES
City Beautiful Movement (and the 1893 Columbian Exposition in Chicago)
Garden City (Ebenezer Howard)
Radiant City (Le Corbusier)
Broadacres (Frank Lloyd Wright)
the Regional Planning Association of America
regionalism
Modernism
New Urbanism
A FEW NAMES:
Lewis Mumford
Rexford Tugwell
Ebenezer Howard
Le Corbusier
Frank Lloyd Wright
Daniel Burnham
Frederick Law Olmsted
Robert Moses
Baron Haussmann
Jane Jacobs
Clarence Stein
Patrick Geddes
Benton MacKaye
Albert Speer
Abraham Levitt (Levittown)
Norman Krumholz
Andres Duany (New Urbanist architect)
A FEW PLACES:
Radburn, NJ
Letchworth and Welwyn, UK
Seaside, FL
Celebration, FL
the "White City" (1893 Columbian Exposition in Chicago)
A few questions to consider. Please note that
some of these questions below are far broader than one can easily answer
in a short essay, so that the actual exam questions will be more
modest.
- Comprehensive planning has been alternately endorsed and
rejected by planners. Define comprehensive planning and briefly discuss
its development in the history of planning and planning theory. Is
it still the dominant approach to planning?
- Explain (briefly) what Lindblom means when he advocates
for "successive limited comparisons" as a planning approach. Is this
really a form of planning, or is it a rejection of planning?
- Outline the characteristic assumptions or justifications
associated with the 4 following approaches to planning theory: traditional,
advocacy, equity, incremental.. (Fainstein/Fainstein) (An
easier alternative to this question would ask about associated political
commitments,
and maybe only ask for 2 or 3 of the four)
- Fishman states (in Urban Utopias): " Le Corbusier
and Frank Lloyd Wright were both intensely concerned with the preservation
of the family in an industrial society, but here as elsewhere they adopted
diametrically opposite strategies." How did these visions differ?
- What are the key points in Jane Jacob's critique of planning
and where does it fall short of providing a new model of intervention?
Is she accurate in lumping together 3 schools of planning thought as "Radiant
Garden City Beautiful?"
- What does Fishman mean when he describes the city plans
of Howard, Wright and Le Corbusier as "social thought in 3 dimensions."
- Fishman asserts that in providing "manifestoes for an urban
revolution" Wright, Howard, and Le Corbusier set out a classical triad and
vocabulary of basic forms that can be used to define the whole range of choices
available to the planner. How would you characterize the key elements
or "dominant values" represented by each of these visions?
- What are the most important features differentiating America's
current experience of suburbia with that of the immediate post war period?
- What key themes for the future of America and its cities
gained expression in the World's Columbian Exposition of 1893.
- Can planning theory, now or in the past, be said to have
a dominant paradigm? a) Trace the history of planning theory from the beginning
of the century in terms of what paradigms were widely adopted. b) Relate these
paradigms to the socio-political context in which planning was operating.
c) During the time when comprehensive rationality (or the rational model)
was particularly influential, is it accurate to say that it constituted a
dominant paradigm? d) What is the current situation?
- Planners have traditionally been able to define themselves
professionally and politically based on where they draw the line between
proper government activities and private interests. However, this may be increasingly
complicated in an era of blurred public-private boundaries , of public-private
partnerships, of quasi-private public authorities (such as port authorities),
and of non-profits (the "third sector"). In addition, planning graduates
increasing work in all three sectors, rather than just for local government.
Explain how the relationship of planners to the public-private boundaries
has changed in recent years. What political, economic and/or cultural
factors have shaped this changing relationship?
- City and regional planning is a recent, interdisciplinary
field that draws heavily from other disciplines. Outline what you think
are the basic intellectual origins of the field. That is, from what
other fields does planning borrow its theories, its political beliefs and/or
its tools of analysis? Does this mix make for a powerful synergy, or
instead (as some have argued) simply create a confusing hodgepodge lacking
a coherent set of tools or best practices? (Do not hesitate to be critical
of planning where appropriate.) Finally, in which direction should
planning head in the future (e.g., more towards economics, architecture,
social work,
public policy, business, etc.)?
- Some authors (e.g., Forester, Healey, Innes) have promoted
communicative-action as a new paradigm to replace the antiquated rational-scientific
model of planning. Explain the supposed shortcomings of the old planning
paradigm, and the promise of communicative-based planning. Do you agree?
- Planning theory can be divided into two general areas:
substantive planning theory and procedural planning theory. Elaborate
on this distinction, and give examples of each. Are there connections
between the two, or are these really two quite distinctive sets of theories?