Planning Problem 1: Bike Danger in NYC
2-3 Supporting Articles:
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/43jqvd/new-york-citys-war-on-bikes-is-dangerous-for-workers-and-the-environment
Summary of articles: Biking in New York City is dangerous. In the past two years alone, there have been at least 20 cyclist deaths. Most streets in New York City do not have many bike lanes, and the ones that do often are unprotected. Many bikers feel like they are taking a risk every time they commute. This is a major problem, considering many people use bikes to serve their livelihood, whether it is getting to work or delivering food and goods. The ways in which the bike lanes are designed allows cars to drive into them, creating a hazard for bikers. Someone merging into the bike lane or even opening their door could result in a serious injury. New York City streets are often considered chaotic, making it ridiculous that there are not more measures in place to protect commuters.
Planning perspective 1:The reason that rational planning could be a possible planning solution is due to the fact that this is a problem that can be identified through facts in which rational solutions could be put in place to solve. This type of planning would be used in order to achieve the desired goal- in this case- put in measures in order to make the NYC streets safer for cyclists. The measures would be implemented using planning knowledge in order to implement different technologies and methods in order to reduce cyclist injuries. If there was a large push to efficiently implement new technologies or expand existing technologies (guarded bike lanes), New York City would quickly become a much safer location to cycle. Rational planning is sometimes a good idea due to the fact that new ideas and technologies could be implemented quickly. The problem that can occur with rational planning is that often the ideas and views of others can be ignored. Planners do not always take into account the voices of a community. When it comes to solving problems the solutions can often be oversimplified.
Planning perspective 2: The cyclist in New York City by far represents the minority of travelers in the city. Most accidents that happen usually don’t go reported and the police do little to help. So the cyclist in NYC needs an advocate that will help make bike lanes safer. The only thing that guards bike lanes is painted lines on the street that motorists can easily driver over and into the bike lane. An advocate planner would put the minoritized group first when planning for the city. The planner would put in place barriers that protect the cyclist in NYC from serious injuries. An advocate can also help in forcing the police to enforce the laws that are too often broken when it comes to how bike lanes are misused. Advocacy does have some shortcomings too, such as it might not be as effective as rational planning, most of the time people only think what is best for the majority, not the minority. Another drawback might be that people would not want their tax money to go to building barriers that they would not even use. The cyclists in NYC do need an advocate so that their voices can be heard loud and clear about having a safer bike lane.
Planning Problem 2: Homelessness in Los Angeles
2-3 Supporting Articles:
https://ktla.com/2019/06/18/homeless-crisis-in-los-angeles-too-many-tentstoo-few-beds/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/06/08/homeless-crisis-los-angeles-county-seeks-help-toilets-rats-trash/1390562001/
Homelessness in Los Angeles is a huge problem known throughout the world. People crowd the streets with tents due to high housing costs throughout LA. These conditions are not sanitary or safe for any human, and this is so prominent and saturated within some areas of Los Angeles. With levels of homelessness on the rise, there must be solutions proposed and attempted to make lives at least somewhat safer and more sanitary for every man, woman, and child who face these terrible conditions.
Proposing a solution that will solve all problems within the LA area is not realistic; however, with planning, problems can be addressed and conditions can begin and continue to improve. Radical and Insurgency planning would be beneficial to work towards solving this problem because it would focus on the whole transformation of the people of the area, as well as their conditions. It would empower citizens to rise up and work towards a social transformation. There is a clear knowledge of the problem in LA, so this planning perspective may educate the homeless and provide opportunities to learn on how to progress through it. This type of planning may run into problems because it relies heavily on the population its seeking to change conditions for. Radical and Insurgency planning also could be problematic for the planner because it would be their job to rally support against oppression- which could be the government in some cases.
Advocacy planning aims to improve the lives of the community they are planning for. This planning puts emphasis on the lives of minorities and the poor which is needed for the homeless demographic in LA. Advocacy planners would involve themselves in learning about the community and ways to help people personally and especially as a whole. This benefits people by giving them someone with the agenda to help them and solely advocate for the community. A planner who advocates for the homeless people of LA may advocate for their continued education, improving sanitary conditions, and access to a wider variety of healthy foods. Advocacy planning would have some shortcomings. With an only focus on what a small community wants and needs, the planners may neglect a wider range of people or neglect the idea that there is a limitation in terms of other peoples’ support and funding.