Planners Erving The People

Question 1:

There is the basic idea that planners either are serving the people they build for or the government that employs them. "Critics still routinely characterize planners as servants of "big government"(Hoch, 22). Despite this speculation, planners have the passion to serve the public interest by emphasizing more towards the future rather than the past. However, it is difficult to carry this task because there are many considerations, which take place in their planning practice. First, that they have to outweigh there personal desires, which means they need to be objective. Plan makers try to preserve significant historical landmarks and natural resources for future generations to come. Other ways planners look forward to serving the community and the future are increases in job opportunities and affordable housing. As we know, the longer we wait to buy a property or housing, the more expensive it gets. This is why planners seek possible solutions to this inevitable market cost over time. Planners also tend to have behaviors induced to them or norms that guide their way of planning. They strive to be more professional by acknowledging other people's insights, without neglecting their own values.

Planners are usually expected to have full knowledge about the problems and issues in the community and to have the credibility to make recommendations. They work on politically based issues, but they also take part in dealing with matters such as development rights, access housing, environmental quality, public investment, and location of settlements (Hoch, 451). They try to follow a code of ethics, if they want the community to trust their proposals and maintain their acknowledgment.

Question 13:

It many of my classes, US Society, Economics, Minorities, and USP 311, scholars have claimed that there is a widening gap between the rich and the poor. Transportation planners are generally concerned with this and the needs of lower income families. Planning has a big role to play in either aiding or hurting the problems that separate the rich from the poor. One major problem is the difference between where the poor live and the jobs that they need and work are located. The first problem is inner city residents, generally the lower income families headed by women, have to commute back and forth between suburbs and city, reverse commuters. This leads to many problems that planners try solving with public transportation. This generally works till the transportation services decline, like they have in recent years for major metropolitan areas. So this only creates a circle of revolving problems. A low-income family stuck without the ability to access gainful employment has no way to leave the circle.

"Transit planners often refer to low-income residents as captive riders, under the assumption that these citizens must use public transportation" (Hoch, 221). Planners want to do what they can to aid in getting low-income families to and from areas of employment, but many times the are left focusing less on those with the greater need, and more on choice riders.

Transit operators have always looked for ways to decrease environmental pollution, energy consumption, and traffic congestion by trying to lessen the amount of private car use. Though this may seem to be the plan, the never-ending financial constraints are impossible to get by. These make it harder to start new reverse commutes that would make it easier for the low-income families to commute from city to suburb. This is where we are forced to look at the equity in transit operator's service decisions. The basic goal would hopefully be to provide greater service to those in greater need next to providing equal service to all. Trying to keep up with the rapid growth in sub-urbanization has made it hard to solve the problems of low-income residents and the car less. "As a result of the sub-urbanization of jobs and the emphasis on choice riders, transit rider ship has been falling far faster among low-income and minority residents than among the general population" (Hoch, 222). This leaves the question in planner's minds of whether providing more public transportation to low-income families is really the solution. Maybe it is the amount of cars? The key is the joint effort on transportation planners and the areas of employment along with the employers in creating ways to work with the needs of low-income families.

Question 2:

The plan making process considers 3 major elements, which are "goals and vision,