Problems
Laredo’s comprehensive plan acknowledges the basics of improving the fundamentals of the city in terms of urban and regional development but lacks the initiative and motive to encourage engagement within the community. Therefore, the problem is how can the city of Laredo, Texas improve its endeavor by receiving a higher contribution of activeness within the public. How can the city account for its people seeking change in certain elements of planning, when their voices aren’t part of the change? How is the city implementing its adjustments without a public hearing to add as a factor in the midst of transition?
Advocates in the planning district along with city officials must understand that facilitating decision-making with the citizenry is part of the planning process (Brooks, 2017). In the approach of decentralized rationality, the planner can act as a proponent for the interests of the government and other organizations who both share correlations with proposing policies in the city. Captivating in these insights, Laredo can establish a decentralized proposition in its plan to fulfill major decisions that can be led by the citizenry to identify problems. Furthermore, coproduction and collaboration in planning can be all the difference in what makes a city prosper in addressing common problems shared by divergent organizations. The dilemma is the city of Laredo had the dynamic to include public participation by offering workshops, open houses, and presentations but fell short in following up with these plans to highlight key planning problems. Instead, this comprehensive plan took procedures that revolved around preexisting plans that were developed before collaborating with the public. Hence, Laredo’s coproduction ideals towards urban development issues are obsolete in production, due to no expansion in shaping planning ideas.
Lastly, the problem is the absence of political processes that weren’t present in the plan. Plural plans should have been presented to the public before the comprehensive plan decided to take effect. The interest of the public to implement appropriate policies in specifications such as political, social, and economic interests have all been assumed to cater to the “majority” of Larodeans (Davidoff, 2011). Moreover, the process leading up to the decisions being made in the plan is left unclear and superstitious in terms of why these decisions have been concluded without there being clear advocates to act as a filter for all parties being affected. As a result, the city plan failed to engage in political debates that would have been the determinant of policies being more refined in the “city plan”.
Alternatives
An alternative is following up with the public to enhance plans to target complications that involve the community, not purely based on planning theory assumptions. The comprehensive plan according to the outline centralized its planning based on two events that passed around comment cards to the room. The room would then participate in filling out set cards to add ideas to a plan that was already pre-existent and identified what were the major problems that are located within the city. As a result, these meetings were concluded and became the major influence in shaping the planning methods for the city. Overall, this process lacked trial balloons to push out a higher initiative to gather more public participants to sculpt the comprehensive plan (Brooks 2002). Developing improved strategies can assist planners to examine several aspects of outcomes in formulating plans. Forecasts should be collaborative, formulate strong linkages, and most importantly forecasts should include city communities to attract different intersections of perceptions (Wachs 2001).
Mobility
• Multi-modal solutions. • Pedestrian focused. • Accommodate for cyclists. • Ease of access to goods and services.
Mixed-Use
• Residential • Recreation • Affordable housing • Commercial • Office • Event space
Compact
• Smart Growth • Land Preservation • New Urbanism
Densify
• Intensify residential and commercial use of the urban core.
The objective in this alternative is to define what roles each party must take for the plan to succeed accordingly. Laredo understands its city profile statistically by definitions of accountability. Consequently, the comprehensive plan must change its policies to distribute information to its community to be more effectively. The city of Laredo accounts for 31% of people falling into levels of severe poverty and 35% of the population not graduating from a credited high school or higher. Subsequently, how can these communities give input on policies of change when they aren’t fully aware of the compromises the city wishes to make without acknowledging them as inputs of change? The plan should not take affirmative action without recognizing its communities thoroughly and understanding the residents that contribute to the advancement of the city (Irazábal & Farhat, 2012). Placemaking in Latino communities must equate to a harder process to follow, but the overall objective is for the plan to fathom participation with these set groups can be achievable with the right advocates to pass on the information. Latino communities will continue to develop on their own without having complete affirmation of what actions can be harmful to the city.
Implementation
A new policy under the comprehensive plan should be implemented to add an element of coproduction and collaboration as a part of the index in the outline. A policy that encourages advocates to hear from those that can’t initially participate in public meetings due to circumstances that limit their participation. With this new proposition, empirical data can now be achievable in the comprehensive plan that represents cultural vitality to be expressed in development. The collaboration between different insights and different ways of living can persuade planning methods to become aware of the different parties that are represented in the city. The implementation of allowing city officials to disburse the need for public participation to be fulfilled in all areas of the city must be endorsed and highly coordinated. If a city plans to achieve a community with moral justice and equity, further demands of public contribution should be the fiscal point of these comprehensive plans. A planner who is unable to communicate correspondingly to their audience loses the connection between themselves and the public engagement possibilities as well.
The implementation of having a specific district that is open to appraisals and adjustments that can be made to the plan must be implemented also. A plan that is subject to change will naturally have a higher level of public engagement because the possibility to receive consultation lets there be a form of mutualism between the public and planning officials. These districts will be supported by city officials, planning advocates, and government authorities that will give feedback to consultations that are brought up for revision. Reexaminations can then be given back to the community in form of public meetings that keep public debate active. Revisions and approvals can be discussed through an agenda that regulates conferences tracking down insights from the public and giving feedback as to why and how it will or won’t work. This method enlightens the public to have a voice in the change for planning while also hosting engaging meetings to converse over controversial dilemmas in the city. This function can evidently promote, increments in the plan to be readjusted and initiate public hearings to be more active in the community.
Future Scenario
He categorized three key components in his memoir, all consisting of urban planning impacts that impelled multiple cities manipulating policies and taking more unethical approaches. The three factors to take culpability were business-as-usual tactics, advanced climate change methods, and expansion of migration. Our grandfather highlighted that these procedures were all contributors toward the downward slope of economic/regional development.
Business-as-Usual
The business-as-usual proposition led many businesses to engage within similar industries in the private sector, enforcing entrepreneurship to take self-accountability and ridicule themselves from the public agenda. Furthermore, with an increase in sole proprietorship, businesses began seeking reinforcement from these individuals and clustered themselves in close proximities. The industry clusters proceeded with innovation and advancement but left behind stakeholders, urban planners, and city officials to consult for their plans moving forward. Our grandfather was an advocate for the degrowth of these movements because he believed these tactics were insensitive, forced gentrification, and segregated lower-income communities. Juan proposed effective altruism in order to pursue a reason to help others as much as possible in defense of longtermism (MacAskill, 2022). Businesses maximizing profit at the expense of future generations was unethical and it could lead to a detrimental concern that may be irreversible.
Climate Change
As for the subject of climate change, our grandfather notified the community that the advancement of structures in a city was generating and disbursing massive amounts of energy/heat waves. The increase of this radiation is shaped by a multitude of infrastructures intensifying their architectural blueprints in order for modernization to become the focal point of the design. However, while buildings were advanced in the technology and base of their designs, they disregarded the harmful effects that they were committing on the quality of air outside. The area will suffer from loss of community engagement, bad air quality, economic development, and the sprawl of houses. As of now, due to the impact of our grandfather, industries have become more mindful of the pessimistic actions of their operations and are working on a way to achieve net zero to eliminate the dimensions of carbon emissions. Resulting in our future generations having a space in the city that contains valuable properties of urban planning such as walkable sidewalks, mix land uses, and preservation of open space.
Migration
Cautioned by our grandfather, he mentioned migration will be a dominant factor in cities losing their value and becoming undependable for future growth. In the era of his later years, Juan began to analyze migration patterns and notably enough, he began to see a sequence of innovative cities having the highest percentage of migration rates. As a result, less industrialized cities began to become flooded with families migrating into these regions due innovative cities facing issues with business-as-usual tactics and advanced climate change. It was at this moment that our grandfather used this convenience to create an activist movement in planning for the future and not for the present. Fortunately enough the problem of migration was used as an example in his proposition to inform people that businesses are not concerned for the betterment of the people. By the same token, he emphasized climate change wasn’t being regulated by city officials and resulted in innovative areas of the city not supporting the quality of life. Lastly, he mentioned migration is the last sequence of events to fix before this mayhem becomes indefinite and leads to people migrating back and forth from different regions that will ultimately destroy them. He quoted from his memoir,” If we can’t be advocates for our future generations, why dream of an outlook that we can’t promise” (Juan, 2038). Our grandfather was a man of morals and only dreamed of his grandchildren being able to continue on with his legacy to promote the importance of planning. The migration movement was the last wave of unfortunate events that did leave many people without homes, food, and economic opportunities. Nonetheless, it was the last predicament which opened the eyes of the community to act on change and become considerate of the future that can be viewed as insightful to all.
References
Brooks, M. P. (2017). Planning theory for practitioners. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9781351179454Brooks,
M. P. (2002). Planning Theory for Practitioners. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351179454
Comprehensive plan. Laredo Planning Department. (n.d.). Retrieved November 3, 2022, from https://www.cityoflaredo.com/LaredoPlanning/comprehensive-plan/
Davidoff, P. (2011). Advocacy and Pluralism in Planning. In R. T. LeGates & F. Stout (Eds.), The City Reader (7th ed., pp. 435–445). Routledge.
Irazábal, C., & Farhat, R. (2012). Historical Overview of Latinos and Planning in the Southwest: 1900 to the present. In Diálogos: Placemaking in Latino Communities (pp. 23–35).
MacAskill, W. (2022, August 5). The Case for Longtermism. The New York Times.https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/05/opinion/the-case-for-longtermism.html
The process. vivalaredo. (n.d.). Retrieved November 3, 2022, from https://www.vivalaredo.org/the-process
Watson, V. (2014). Co-production and collaboration in planning – The difference. Planning Theory & Practice, 15(1), 62–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2013.866266
Credits:
Created with an image by Romolo Tavani - "Nativity Scene - Birth Of Jesus Christ With Manger In Snowy Night And Starry Sky - Abstract Defocused Background"