Effective Urban Planning - Essay Example

What constitutes the aesthetic aspect of urban environments, and is this a quality of the environment which urban planning should seek to maintain and enhance? Urban planning involves the development of towns and cities that foster social connections between people and maintaining the aesthetic quality of the place. Effective urban planning is sustainable and has long-term effects on the development of the cities. These terms are normative concepts since they depict the aims of urban planning. Aesthetics is associated with a sensory experience. It encompasses the appreciation of things one like. The aesthetic quality is determined by how pleasing something is to the senses. Environmental aesthetics relate to the sensory experience of the environment. The aesthetic sense of urban environments delineates certain characteristics of the environment that make it pleasing to the senses. The definition of aesthetics from an environmental perspective entails the experience associated with the environment rather than an objective account of the object. The normal environmental does not limit itself to one or two sensory modalities; on the other hand, it is a multi-sensory experience, making use of hearing, speaking, seeing etc all at the same time. Moreover, the experience of environment is often dynamic in nature. This refers to the feeling of moving through space and the visual impression of scenes coming and going away like a motion film. When moving, one gives attention to the environment in order to navigate around; therefore, the environment has a significant effect on the aesthetic experience of people. Most of the objects that people view in their environment are stationary, while many are moving. This further adds to the rich experience of sensory details that the environment feeds into the sensual perceptions of people. Since the environmental aesthetic experience can be very diverse, it varies from person to person. As the famous adage goes that one man’s meet is another man’s poison, certain aspects of the environment can be sensually pleasing for some people, and at the same time unpleasant for others. This subjectivism can be analyzed by an example of the aesthetic experience of modern cities in view of road traffic. The ways cities are designed are important in many respects. Poorly designed cities do not encourage social communication, and depict a chaotic setting where everything seems to be disorganized. Such cities can have little impact on the pleasing aesthetic experiences. Urban planning can reform the structural and social framework of cities. More organized network of roads can connect different parts of the city together. Although quiet peaceful roads are aesthetically pleasing, havoc and mayhem created by congestion of traffic can render the aesthetic aspect of urban environments useless. With advances in technology and the earning power of people, more of them are able to afford cars, leading to the subsequent rise in the traffic seen on roads. In order to cope up with the demands of increasing road traffic, more roads have been constructed to facilitate the smoother flow of traffic and reduce traffic congestion. However there is a downside to the construction of more roads. Cities become a complex meshwork of inter-connected highways, over-passes, under-passes, bridges and ramps. Moreover, more cars necessitate the construction of larger car parks and larger roads along with the construction of new ones (Taylor 2003). With new roads and interconnections between them, sign posts and street lights as well as footpaths have proliferated rapidly. Roads are being constructed be demolishing structures and using up free space that otherwise increased the greenery of the area or gave the area a sense of openness. The construction sites and the pollution caused by onsite work are not pleasing to senses. For pedestrians and cyclists, the construction of new roads and the heavy traffic that flows on them takes away the recreation and security they felt from strolling or cycling in a serene environment. The visual as well as auditory impact of congested roads is not lifting for the senses. Also, the smell emanating from the burning of fuels in vehicles does little to contribute to the aesthetic sense of the people. Heavy traffic can also be heavy on the senses for drivers. The noise pollution and the frustration that emerges from slow flow of traffic deplete the energy of the drivers, and therefore do not fare well in aesthetic terms. Although traffic is considered pleasing to some people, most of the people do not appreciate the increased traffic since they do not find it aesthetic. For something to be aesthetically pleasing, it is not necessary for it to be beautiful. Some elements of the urban environment are not essentially beautiful, yet without them, the environment would not be as aesthetic. Old buildings might not be very functional, yet if high-tech shopping centers and plazas are constructed in their place that infringe upon the recreation of people accustomed to serene and quiet settings, the activity would be unpleasant to the senses of the people. Without doubt, in aesthetic terms, the defensive value of conservation areas has played an integral role in preventing premature demolition, in ensuring more detailed control and in promoting a higher standard of planning application (Punter 1987). One of the main aspects of urban environments is the kinetics linked with it. Places that people find pleasing, become unpleasant if they environment around them is not pleasing to the senses. For instance, people are generally fond of parks, but if stench of burnt fuel or any other source of bad odor is nearby, the bad odor mitigates the aesthetic beauty of the place. Likewise, people’s preferences can vary. Thus, if someone finds something pleasing to the senses, it is not mandatory for other people to like it as well. This subjectivism is influenced partly by culture and partly by the person’s individual experiences. Some conservative religious groups are not in favor of girls and boys talking to each other; thus, a place where people are socializing with each other would not be aesthetically pleasing for such people. Similarly there might be differences in opinion about the use of free space. For nature-lovers, a green space would be more aesthetically pleasing, while for many teenagers, gaming clubs and shopping malls can be recreational and pleasing to the senses. The subjectivism associated with aesthetics forms the essence of government policy and urban design. It can be misleading for policy makers to assess the implications of development projects when deciding what aesthetic issues are important for the majority of the public. When formulating such projects, urban planners need to address the issues of subjectivity. Authorities misinterpret the role of subjectivism in environmental aesthetics. Considering that subjectivism excludes them from being accountable to the general public can have deleterious results on the sustainability of development projects. Authorities often assume that since personal preferences can be different for people, the aesthetic impact of new roads, renovation of old buildings, construction of new buildings, reorganization of land etc. will be accepted by people on different levels depending on their subjectivism. However, if urban planners do not consider the opinions of the majority of the public, they will create an urban environment that does not promote the health and well-being of the people. If they enforce their own notions of what constitutes environmental aesthetics without any regard for the public, their ideas will come into clash with that of the city-dwellers. As a result, if these project are implemented and an urban environment shaped along the lines of urban planning theory as thought fit by planners is developed, then people will be forced to live in a community that they do not feel comfortable in. A home is a person’s haven and his recreational hub. If the environment that he or she lives in is devoid of aesthetics that they like, then it will have minimal meaning in front of the people. In fact, people would be condemned to live in an environment is hard, noisy, polluted and ugly (Taylor 1994). The beauty of cities is important as it acts positively on population moral while the importance of urban aesthetics derives from the benefiting effects it has on culture (Vlad 2009). City planners need to keep in mind that aesthetics are important in developing projects that have long-term effects. Aesthetics is a common ground upon which to understand how cities perform (Thwaites 2007). If planners are indifferent to the needs of the population, the plans that they would make will not be reflective of the preferences of the inhabitants. Since these people will be the ones who will be living in the city and be directly affected by the measures, their participation in promoting or criticizing the projects will represent the success or failure of the development schemes. Thus, in conclusion, authorities need to devise urban plans that support the aesthetic values of the people. There are socio-cultural differences inherent in the society regarding aesthetics, and so groups may differ in their views of what is aesthetic and what things are precluded from it. This subjectivism does not permit city planners to enforce their own notions of aesthetics in building cities; rather the city planners should not consider the public as passive and should adopt a strategy that has general consensus on its applicability. References Thwaites, K., 2007. Urban sustainability through environmental design: approaches to time-people-place responsive urban spaces. Oxon (OX): Routledge. Punter, J., 1987. A history of aesthetic control: Part 2, 1953-1985. TPR, 58 (1), 29-62. Taylor, N., 2003. The Aesthetic Experience Traffic in the Modern City. Urban Studies, 40 (8), 1609-25. Taylor, N., 1994. Aesthetic judgment and environmental design. TPR, 65 (1), 21-40. Vlad, L. B., 2009. Urban Aesthetics: Emergence and Development. [Online] Romania: CCASP TERUM. Available at: http://www.um.ase.ro/No12/6.pdf [Accessed date 17 May 2010]. Read More