History and Theory of Urban and Regional Planning, in the
Questions
The idea of social justice may signify many different things. David Harvey, a supporter of a person's right to the city, contends that social justice programs and policies should steer clear of six types of oppression: marginalization, helplessness, violence, cultural imperialism, exploitation of labor in the home or workplace, and environmental harm. Urban theorist Susan Fainstein defines the notion of the just city as one that prioritizes the participation of relatively powerless groups in decision-making and equality of results (Thomas, 2012). If planning is to play any role in bringing about the dawn of the just city, it must take seriously its connection to white supremacy. The rejection and deconstruction of white supremacy so that life opportunities become independent of one's assigned social location should be a major organizational concept of the planning profession (Williams, 2020). Majority minority racial groups, such as blacks, Hispanics, Asians, etc., make up the majority of disadvantaged populations in the United States. Urban regions experience the demands of increasing urbanization under conditions of poverty, unemployment, bad infrastructure, unpredictable political situations, and weak public institutions, according to a solid realization of the necessity for urban planning (Watson, 2014).
Research Question: How does Seattle's "Pedestrian Lighting Citywide Plan" provide for "reparative planning?" How does the plan create an environment that encourages pedestrian use while connecting the poorer communities of marginalized races with the rest of the city? How does the plan unify the citizens and give them a sense of place, safety, and confidence?
Methods
For this case study research, I am assessing the Seattle Pedestrian Lighting Citywide Plan through the lens of Equity and Advocacy Planning Theory. Equity planning "is a framework in which advocacy planners in government use their research, analytical, and organizing skills to influence opinion, mobilize underrepresented constituencies, and advance and perhaps implement policies and programs that redistribute public and private resources to the poor and working class in cities." (Brooks, 2002). Cleveland, where Norman Krumholz served as the advocacy-focused planning director from 1969 to 1979, is a prime example in this respect. He was a planner and educator who championed equity in planning. Equal access to the city's facilities and resources was a fundamental criterion for the suggestions made by Krumholz and his team, and during his tenure, the needs of low-income areas were given first attention (Brooks, 2002). Advocacy planning represents a departure from scientific, objective, or rational planning (Davidoff, 2011). It is predicated on taking into account the many interests involved in the actual planning process. Advocacy planners approach a problem through a series of attacks rather than a one-shot effort (Brooks, 2002).
Paul Davidoff, a planner and attorney, defined and supported advocacy planning. Davidoff's 1965 essay, "Advocacy and Pluralism in Planning," published in the Journal of the American Institute of Planners, was the first to broadly introduce the idea to other professional planners. According to this pluralistic and inclusive planning paradigm, planners should work to reflect the interests of all social groups. The aim of the planning process, according to Davidoff, is to choose which of various alternative scenarios or vision plans will be accepted and put into action. For each of the parties participating in the planning choices, each result includes unique advantages and costs. As a result, no single strategy could be considered the "correct plan" for everyone (Davidoff, 2011). A part of Seattle's Pedestrian Lighting Citywide Plan's purpose is to have "various departments in the city playing a role in pedestrian lighting," which is in line with this philosophy. The program's objectives also include "encouraging improved departmental coordination and collaboration and presenting a clear vision for the future of pedestrian lighting in Seattle." A criticism of advocacy planning is that "collaborative relationships within government can take on a combination of both conflict and collaboration" (Watson, 2014), which is often reflected in the work of the local government and frequently leads to inequitable solutions when customers are not evenly treated. The city of Seattle has handled this issue by identifying the sections of the city that require more planning than others using accurate data and maps, and then giving financing priority to those areas.
The methods used to examine the case were:
• Review of the completed Pedestrian Lighting Plan for Seattle
• Review of how the plan advocates for policies and services that will reduce inequalities between marginalized, low-income areas and wealthier areas with more opportunity
• Review of a district within the Seattle and how the District Authority planned for lighting that has improved their sense of place, security, and confidence
• Review of the different city organizations that have had input into the Pedestrian Lighting Citywide Plan
Findings
The Seattle Pedestrian Master Plan (PMP) is a 20-year plan to make Seattle the country's most accessible and walkable metropolis. It emphasizes community vitality, resident safety, and resident well-being. The plan tackles issues such as what should be constructed first, when, and with what instruments to enhance the quality and comfort of the pedestrian realm with a limited budget (Seattle.gov, 2020). In 2012, the Seattle Agency of Transportation (SDOT) added a component to the PMP that addressed pedestrian illumination, which had not previously been prioritized for planning and design at the citywide level or neatly fit into the work plans of any one department. Over the years, Seattle's approach to pedestrian illumination has been disjointed. In order to improve how the City plans for, designs, and implements pedestrian lighting, the Pedestrian Lighting Master Plan for Seattle was developed. It offers a data-driven approach to placing pedestrian lighting in the right-of-way for safety, security, economic development, active transportation, and access. The operations and maintenance of pedestrian lighting are to be entirely supported out of the City's General Fund due to the importance of pedestrian lighting for the safety and security of walkers as well as being a major instrument to promote walking as a mode of transportation.
A primary purpose of the The Pedestrian Lighting Master Plan is to reduce inequalities of marginalized communities in terms of lighting design. Pedestrian lighting has traditionally been limited to neighborhood business areas. Where there are large scale installations of pedestrian lights in residential areas, they were typically funded through property owner contributions as part of under-grounding over-head utilities. This causes a lot of unequal lighting treatment throughout a district and creates dark and dangerous neighborhoods. Hispanic, Black, Asian, and multi-/other race residents in the US reside in areas with more light pollution (glare, trespass, poor color quality) which can create unsafe and less desirable areas within the city. (Nadybal et al, 2020). The Pedestrian Master Plan (PMP) High Priority Plan, which was adopted in 2010, serves as the foundation for developing a prioritized map for upcoming investments in pedestrian lighting. The investment takes advantage of pedestrian access to transportation, shops and services, schools, and other high demand pedestrian sites by placing illumination where walkers need it most. The investment may take advantage of pedestrian access to transportation, shops and services, schools, and other high demand pedestrian destinations by placing illumination where walkers need it most. The Pedestrian Master Plan (PMP) employs a modified data set to identify High Priority Areas, and three areas of analysis are used to identify gaps in lighting illumination and where it should be prioritized most.. The first is based on land use as a generator or attractor of pedestrian use, and it is called pedestrian demand. The second method is socioeconomic analysis, which prioritizes historically underserved communities and satisfies the goals of the City's effort on racial and social justice by utilizing a range of social and economic data. The third step is called street-type analysis, which categorizes each section of a roadway depending on how the City intends to use the street network.
The last stage of the gap analysis involved overlaying the street network without pedestrian illumination to identify the locations of the gaps in relation to the high priority zones. The gap analysis revealed several street segments without pedestrian illumination in high priority locations. Setting installation priorities for pedestrian lights starts here.
There are many community organizations who have had impact on the lighting design vision and who advocate for the community. These include Seattle City Light (SCL), Seattle Department of Transportation (SDOT), Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), Lighting DEsign Lab (LDL), Interim Community Development Association, International Special Review, Seattle C-ID Preservation and Development Authority, Seattle Parks and Recreation, and King County Metro. George Mason University and the SPD collaborated to map and analyze crime statistics spanning several years. According to the data, 4-5% of Seattle's block faces, or "hotspots," were the scene of 50% of the city's crimes. For SDOT, SPD created "hotspot" statistics on crimes that may be impacted by pedestrian illumination. The map of high priority regions for pedestrian illumination was developed using this information as an extra consideration. After doing this analysis, the city determined that attention should be given to parks, junctions, hospitals, schools, elder centers, urban centers, transport hubs, and station areas. Along with any illumination for automobiles on the road, there should also be lighting for walkers.
An area within Seattle has been the subject of a neighborhood lighting study by the Seattle Chinatown International District Preservation and Development Authority (SCIDPDA). Seattle's Chinatown International District (C-ID), a distinctive cultural center for locals, Asian Americans, and Pacific Islanders, was an unequal area of Seattle. As a custodian of art, history, and tradition, as well as a haven from prejudice, it is a district that is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The region also has issues like poverty, which affects a large number of elderly inhabitants. Residents of the neighborhood struggle with issues including inadequate hygienic conditions, homelessness, and general public safety. SCIDPDA went through a process of assessing the illumination of the district along with hosting a meeting with the neighborhood residents in Chinatown, several night-time walking tours, and the Seattle Police Department. On a comment card, participants submitted their thoughts on the lighting problems. According to the study's initial community findings, the C-ID had lighting problems, such as erratic and intermittent lights, which made nighttime walking conditions dangerous. There were various distinct kinds of illumination throughout the space. It was simple to identify areas that were too bright, too dark, glare-prone, or that had poor color quality light sources. While certain parts of the district felt gloomy and out of place, there were many wonderful instances of lighting that accentuates the character and vigor of the neighborhood.
SCIPDA worked with several community partners to alleviate the lighting issues using logistical considerations, community feedback, and map layering. The study found that adequate lighting in areas of importance or ones that needed more nighttime activity, particularly for pedestrians and retail establishments, and boosted perceptions of the C-ID as a welcome and safe place for everyone.
In conclusion, there should be more emphasis on lighting design in marginalized and powerless communities across the United States in order to provide a place of comfort, promote health, and safety to all residents.
Future Scenario
Business-as-Usual
The United States has continued to see a wider distribution of lighting design inequity due to the ineffectiveness of planning efforts to support communities of color. As a result, there has been an increase of crime in blighted areas. The increase in murders has put the whole nation at unease and jails have become overpopulated. There has also been a steady increase in fatal pedestrian accidents, primarily with children, older adults, and racial and ethnic minorities. The dangers of walking have gotten to a point that citizens have do not want to walk anywhere anymore. People are therefore leaving unhealthy and unsafe lifestyles. Obesity rates are higher than they've ever been as people choose to drive everywhere rather than walk. Those in poorer communities that can't afford to drive or who don't have access to transit, become even more separated from their communities and are less likely to see past 25 due to the heightened risks of walking to their places of employment. Lack of lighting policies have influenced racial communities being completely segregated from the rest of the nation. The health and well-being of people of color are constantly at risk and being further exacerbated by obtrusive light and poor colored lighting.
Advanced Climate Change
The operation of urban ecosystems and the services they provide have come under danger as a result of substantial changes in city lighting and urban design brought about by the urbanization of the world's population. Natural light that is used by animals and other creatures as resource and a way to learn about their surroundings has been disrupted by the glare from bad lighting practices. The bird population is at an all time low as the bad artificial lighting has misguided their flight patterns making them fly into structures. There is an increase in light pollution which is increasing the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Because less people are walking, that means more cars are on the road which means there are even more greenhouse gases causing climate change.
Alternative Future
Every city is required to have a lighting master plan that puts marginalized communities at the top priority level. It's easy for pedestrians to get to places they need to get to and fast. Every city's walkable score has gone up by 50 due to the increased planning efforts in lighting design.
Marginalized races have experienced a rapid social change in which they've been freed from the history of oppression and marginalization within the city. People of color do not feel like outsiders in spaces that were not created for and by them. The city is more inclusive and people of color are able to survive in an increasingly globalizing world.
References
Brooks, M. P. (2002). Planning Theory for Practitioners. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351179454
Butler, O. E. (2019). Parable of the sower. Grand Central Publishing.
Davidoff, P. (2011). Advocacy and Pluralism in Planning. In R. T. LeGates & F. Stout (Eds.), The City Reader (7th ed., pp. 435–445). Routledge.
Seattle Chinatown International District Preservation and Development Authority. (2018). Neighborhood Lighting Study.
Thomas, J. M. (2012). Social Justice as Responsible Practice: Influence of Race, Ethnicity, and the Civil Rights Era. In Planning ideas that matter: Livability, territoriality, governance, and reflective practice. MIT Press.
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
Williams, R. A. (2020). From Racial to Reparative Planning: Confronting the White Side of Planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X20946416