Planners Network Disorientation Guide 2nd Edition Launch

Embedded Planning Is Worth The Struggle at CSUN

Navigating the Nexus Panel

Shout out to Cal Poly Pomona students in URP 5400 for organizing the panel, “Navigating the Nexus: Politics, Planning, and Policy.”

I enjoyed sharing space with fellow panelists and students.

We shared stories, reflections, and tactics for navigating the politics of planning.

I got the chance to talk with a new audience about Embedded Planning as a method to bridge the theory/practice gap.

What’s Theory Got To Do With It?

Article: https://c1typlann3r.medium.com/planning-theory-and-planning-practice-d4bf60a61146

Planning Ideas and Action at Cal Poly Pomona

Flyer for urban planning course, URP 5120: Planning Ideas and Action

Embedded Planning Is Worth The Struggle

Infographic by Columbia GSAPP students

Honored to close out the 2022 Lectures in Planning Series at Columbia GSAPP with:

“Embedded Planning Is Worth The Struggle”

Tuesday, November 29, 2022 @ 1:15pm NY / 4:15pm LA. We will be live streaming. For details, check out the event page: https://www.arch.columbia.edu/events/2735-jonathan-pacheco-bell

Session description:

Planning is political. Decisions about the built environment inherently impact people’s lives. Everything planners do involves a struggle over “who gets what, when, where, how, and why?” Planners respond to this debate but many of our practices have resulted in unjust planning. In this time of increasing interrogation of planning’s legacies of inequity, planners are moving with intention to be better partners. And as part of repair and healing, planners are seeking more ways to build meaningful community partnerships. No longer is technocratic rational planning the default. But while the pivot to participatory methods helped democratize the planning process, professional practice still prefers project-based, one-off, transactional engagement.

Orthodox planning must evolve.

A better way is possible.

Los Angeles-based urban planner Jonathan Pacheco Bell urges practitioners to consider Embedded Planning praxis. Developed by Bell on the ground in South Central LA, Embedded Planning is a way to fundamentally restructure community engagement and practice. Embedded Planning means planning from the street, not from a desk. Embedded Planners work in the spaces and places of community members, building bridges with marginalized communities harmed by inequitable planning. Embedded Planning is a praxis that puts theory into action to better this world. Since Bell declared Embedded Planning exists in 2018, it has grown into an international movement among emerging planners. In this talk, Bell will show how Embedded Planning is being used to transform engagement into lasting community partnerships rooted in trust.

Community members have embraced Embedded Planning because they feel seen and included. Yet despite this praxis bringing ignored voices to the table, Bell encountered blatant hostility from planning figureheads who judged Embedded Planning as “too political.” Through storytelling and personal reflection, Bell will illustrate the struggle to carry out Embedded Planning in the face of power. Attendees will learn the challenges and benefits of this unorthodox approach and understand why this praxis is the future of planning.

Modernism vs Postmodernism

I’m revising an early essay I wrote interrogating planning theory in practice. It’ll be the first entry in my Student Papers Archive. I needed to do some background research on the two theories under scrutiny: Rational Planning and Postmodern Planning. In addition to peer reviewed journals from the planning realm, I found this exceptionally helpful chart comparing Modernism and Postmodernism.

From the URL cited on page 2, I noted the author is Professor Martin Irvine at Georgetown. But a copy-paste of the URL didn’t take me to the chart; instead it forwarded me to the professor’s homepage. And I couldn’t find the chart there. The last revision is dated 2012, but this side-by-side certainly is relevant 10 years later — and will remain so.

I want this chart to live on. I don’t know if the host site’s future update(s) will retain it. So much web ephemera is lost without us knowing. So, I’m doing my part by sharing Professor Irvine’s Modernism vs Postmodernism resource here. Researchers, check it out and please be sure to cite the original author if using the chart.