This research discusses the nature of urban planning, groups involved, advocacy planning and the ideas of various proponents. The research draws conclusions about the type and extent of urban planning appropriate for future urban development. Urban planning has been controversial in recent years. Some have equated the concept with socialism and totalitarian governments. Some have opposed such planning for selfish reasons. Others have strongly encouraged it for sociological and psychological reasons.
While some forms of planning have been around for many decades, the economic disasters of the Depression era led to more thought about the problem. Redevelopment occurred as the centers of cities became old and dilapidated and there was an exodus to the suburbs, which lasted into the 1960s. Experts understood that coordination of concerned government agencies was essential if anything was to be accomplished. This task fell to executives in government rather than legislators. In the pre-war years, established land use principles prevented uncontrolled development, which most people considered a worthy objective.
About this time, however, special interest groups began to be concerned about the maintenance of property values and economic advantage. The federal government also became involved, with Section 701 of the Housing Act of 1954. This act brought smaller and poorer cities into the picture because the federal government provided the funds for urban planning. This legislation mandated community improvement centering on a comprehensive plan. Getting this money required minimum effort by the community. Planning thus began to be accepted--but not without criticism.
Standards evolved. First was the aesthetic: people wanted to improve the look of their cities. Second was the community power structure and its impact on the planning process. Third was the relationship between environmental factors and social we...