Just Who Are We Planning For Anyway?

Do planners need to give more consideration to public opinion and community interests?

Read Time: 3 minutes

June 3, 2002, 12:00 AM PDT

By Daniel Hamilton

 Daniel HamiltonA low-income housing project in a suburban single-family neighborhood. A drug-treatment facility on the next street over. Heck, let's include a commercial center at the next big intersection, which may include a discount retailer, pawn shop, or thrift store. What do all these have in common? Most planners will see them immediately as controversy laden, public outcry spurring NIMBY monsters, and those planners would be right. Projects such as these (and many others) generate huge amounts of public dissent, and were you to take poll of community residents, would likely be opposed by the majority of the population. So if this is the will of the people, then why are planners continually allowing them to be built? If we as a profession are charged with creating an urban form that best serves the people who live here, then shouldn't we let public opinion decide which projects are allowed and which ones aren't? After all, whom are we planning for?

Planners are called upon daily to make ethical decisions regarding the development of their communities. Professional ethics require that we work to provide suitable accommodations for low-income families and individuals, bring essential social services to the community however possible, and not discriminate economically or socially in making land use decisions. It is in this sense that planners knowingly and usually proudly stand up against public opinion, stating that "this is what is right and we will do it regardless of what the community thinks." Public opinion seems less important than the planners' own sense of morality, and it is rare indeed that a planner holds the ethics of the public in higher regard than those of their profession.

This is interesting for a profession that is supposedly charged with representing the interests of the community they work for. Public input is certainly asked for and "considered" in planning activities, but how often is it reflected in plans and actions when it violates our sense of professional obligation? If a city's people called for increased sprawl and no low-income housing, would it be or should it be a planners duty to plan for that? Should the environmentally conscious planner disregard his/her own sense of ethical responsibility to denigrate air and water quality if that is the will of the constituency? The answer to this seems obvious to most of us, but why? Most planners would answer that they have a superior knowledge and understanding of the big picture, and therefore they are better suited to make those decisions for the less-informed public. And while that is certainly a reasonable answer, it flies in the face of the democratic process, and leads to the inevitable conclusion that the development of a community is outside the control of the people that live there.

There is an old planning joke that says if a planner was a vegetable, he would be a watermelon - green on the outside, and red on the inside. This rings true now more than ever in communities faced with ever increasing pressures of suburban sprawl, overcrowded schools, and congestion. Planners feel the obligation to address these problems, but are constrained by a public that generally fails to understand that the health, safety, welfare, and morals of the community must take precedence over the potential negative impacts to some individuals. And when the planner makes the decision to approve that next controversy laden, public outcry spurring NIMBY monster, he should feel confident that he is improving the community for its residents, despite what they may think.

Daniel Hamilton is an Associate Planner with the City of Galt, California. He received his Master's Degree in Urban Planning from the University of Kansas in 1999, and worked as a planning consultant in Kansas City, MO prior to joining the City of Galt.

View More
Chicago Commute

The Right to Mobility

As we consider how to decarbonize transportation, preserving mobility, especially for lower- and middle-income people, must be a priority.

January 26, 2023 - Angie Schmitt

Sharrow bike markings on black asphalt two-lane road with snowy trees

Early Sharrow Booster: ‘I Was Wrong’

The lane marking was meant to raise awareness and instill shared respect among drivers and cyclists. But their inefficiency has led supporters to denounce sharrows, pushing instead for more robust bike infrastructure that truly protects riders.

January 26, 2023 - Streetsblog USA

View of stone-paved street with pedestrians and "Farmers Market" neon sign on left and old buildings on right in Seattle, Washington

Push and Pull: The Link Between Walkability and Affordability

The increased demand for walkable urban spaces could make them more and more exclusionary if cities don’t pursue policies to limit displacement and boost affordability.

January 27, 2023 - Smart Cities Dive

View of Tacoma, Washington with Mount Rainier in background

Tacoma Developing New Housing Policy

The city’s Home in Tacoma plan is designed to address the region’s growth and rising housing prices, but faces local backlash over density and affordability concerns.

1 hour ago - The Urbanist

Green alley under construction

A New Paradigm for Stormwater Management

Rather than shuttling stormwater away from the city and into the ocean as quickly as possible, Los Angeles is now—slowly—moving toward a ‘city-as-sponge’ approach that would capture and reclaim more water to recharge crucial reservoirs.

2 hours ago - Curbed

Aerial view of residential neighborhood in La Habra, California at sunset

Orange County Project Could Go Forward Under ‘Builder’s Remedy’

The nation’s largest home builder could receive approval for a 530-unit development under an obscure state law as the city of La Habra’s zoning laws hang in limbo after the state rejected its proposed housing plan.

3 hours ago - Orange County Register

Write for Planetizen

Urban Design for Planners 1: Software Tools

This six-course series explores essential urban design concepts using open source software and equips planners with the tools they need to participate fully in the urban design process.

Planning for Universal Design

Learn the tools for implementing Universal Design in planning regulations.