Problem Solution Essay on The Stereotypes of Urban Density

- Introduction: One of the many sectors of urban design that city planners address is urban density. City planners are an important part of designing urban areas to support higher densities in order to remedy the environmental, economic, and social impacts of urban sprawl. In this paper, I will discuss two creative solutions to address the stereotypes of urban density including monotony, overcrowdedness, and disconnection from nature. 

- Your point of view: Good urban designs include mixed-use zoning, clearly defined private green space, generous public green spaces, interconnected street networks, gentle density, architectural diversity, and architecture with private outdoor spaces. From my point of view, all of these characteristics of a good design provide a more environmentally, economical, and socially desirable place to live. They also address the stereotypes of urban density including monotony, overcrowdedness, and disconnection from nature. 

Something people, including myself, might struggle with is action without planning, upzoning without first proposing good plans. I think that’s reasonable considering that bad planning can lead to devaluing a neighborhood environmentally, economically, and socially. The first creative solution I propose is planning before action. If a city sees a need to upzone an area, it should first hire city planners to create good urban designs to ensure upzoning will not conform to urban density stereotypes. 

I have always been open to the benefits of urban density, but I also have had some biases about it. What changed that bias for me is education about how good urban designs can address those stereotypes. That’s why my next creative proposition is to include public education about urban planning in the form of advertisement. It’s one thing to inform the public of change, and another to advertise it. From my point of view, hearing that my neighborhood is being upzoned might cause me heartache, but if I see advertisements for good designs such as bike paths, greenery, and shops, that’s something I could embrace. 

-Counter Argument: There are usually ways the public can find out what is going on in their neighborhood and view future design plans. It could be argued that this is enough and that advertising design propositions would not help people be more comfortable with upzoning due to strong-rooted bias. That argument is valid and worth recognition because there are people who want their neighborhoods to remain exactly the same forever. No matter how good the proposal, there will be people who oppose change. However, I would argue that my creative solutions could help enough people to embrace urban density to move forward with effective upzoning. 

- Evidence: Reading about San Fransisco activists helped me understand something that NIMBY’s express, which is that uncontrolled upzoning causes chaos and devalues the human experience of an area. On the other front, Urban sprawl is unsustainable and the population is growing rapidly, as represented in the book visualizing density.  

- Conclusion: City planners have never been more needed to act as sort of a mediator in people’s backyards. NIMBY’s, in my opinion, raise a valid concern, and I think addressing that concern is essential to move forward with providing space for population growth. I believe advertising good designs before upzoning can address the concerns of NIMBYs and provide a way for populations to grow denser, and in return, more sustainably.