The city of Flagstaff has a limited supply of quality housing for low- and moderate-income households; therefore, the government prepared a multifamily housing development plan. However, the owners of single-family houses who live in the neighborhood of the construction area are opposed to the development on to a sunflower field that supports the image of San Francisco. Due to such controversial opinions, the wishes of both citizens and the government cannot be accomplished simultaneously. The American Planning Association (2020) claims that successful planning should include and reflect the wishes and values of an entire community. Hence, to make a rational decision, all risks and benefits require to be analyzed and estimated, and the conflict needs to be solved.
In my opinion, the city should not defer the construction of the multifamily housing complex. From my point of view, in this situation, the probable outcomes of both decisions need to be compared. The construction is aimed at meeting the needs of habitation deprived or low-income families. Therefore, its goal is to cover the basic physical needs of poor citizens. The intention to save the sunflower field is mostly driven by the aesthetic, cultural, and emotional interests of community members whose basic requirements are already covered. Although culture development and maintenance is a significant part of the city’s and government’s policy, to my mind, it cannot be the main priority as long as some citizens have inappropriate living conditions. According to LaGro (2013), one of the first stages of urban planning is the site analysis stage which means ubiquitous consideration of construction aspects. Therefore, regardless of my point of view, the issue can be viewed from various perspectives.
The first type of issue regarding the problem is social. For example, Levy (2017) believes that planners should be concerned not only about the less fortunate but also estimate the social implications of their decisions. In this construction planning process, the conflict between the interests of two communities represents a social issue. On the one hand, the interests of low- and moderate-income citizens without proper habitation need to be supported. On the other hand, the sunflower field is public property; hence, the interests of neighborhood representatives are valuable as well. In such conflicts, the city can whether to negotiate or withdraw. From my point of view, the first option seems more rational and beneficial as the owners of single-family houses can be explained the main objectives and goals of this construction. The conflict can also be solved through court and a series of trials; however, it is the last measure that requires to be taken. The second option is to withdraw and preserve the sunflower field, but in this case, a number of people will remain deprived of adequate living conditions.
The second perspective that needs to be mentioned is environmental, as the multifamily housing complex will be built on the territory of a sunflower field. Here, the total number of parks and green zones should be given consideration. If the city of Flagstaff is nature-deprived, lacks cultural objects, individuality, or beautiful places, then the construction will probably need relocation despite the spent money. In such a situation, the city regulations may consider the sunflower field as not only an object of beauty, elation, and admiration but as a source of fresh air and sunflower seeds as well. According to Levy (2017), environmental issues can produce a negative effect and result in a political conflict due to large gains or losses. However, if the district contains many cultural, historical, and natural places, the multifamily housing complex construction should be given a higher priority. In the example of Radburn is depicted that environmental issues are not always the main concern in the planning process (Birch, 1980). Therefore, if the regulating authorities took a course on infrastructure development, the ‘green’ questions may be irrelevant.
In addition, the third perspective means that economic issues should be taken into consideration. For example, one of the six principles of the American Planning Association implemented by planning is a resilient economy. It requires to ensure the community’s preparedness to economic positive or negative change support green business growth (Godschalk, 2015). For example, Klosterman (1985) states that public goods benefit specific groups of individuals but, along with it, provide a society with a benefit that cannot be rationed or estimated. Therefore, in addition to the environmental perspective, the economic benefits of both the sunflower field and the multifamily housing complex need to be evaluated. In this situation, the multifamily housing development might be more beneficial for the city as the level of living conditions increases, as well as several other economic showings. Although it is not a commercial building, it plays an important role in the city’s economic and social conditions.
To put it in a nutshell, the continuation of construction planning and development may be more beneficial to the government, the city, and its inhabitants. The multifamily housing complex is economically effective, has a higher social priority, and depends on the environmental situation in the district. By looking at the issue from various planning perspectives, I can conclude that the provision of low- or moderate-income citizens with new habitation is the right choice in the existing situation. Although some risks and possible challenges exist, the city of Flagstaff should concentrate on basic need coverage during the planning process.
References
American Planning Association. (2020). What is planning?
Birch, E. L. (1980). Radburn and the American planning movement. Journal of the American Planning Association, 46(4), 424-439. Web.
Godschalk, D., & Rouse, D. (2015). Sustaining places: Best practices for comprehensive plans (pas report). American Planning Association.
Klosterman, R.E. (1985). Arguments for and against planning. The Town Planning Review, 56(1), 5-20, Web.
LaGro, J. A. (2013). Site analysis: Informing context-sensitive and sustainable site planning and design. John Wiley & Sons.
Levy, J. M. (2017). Contemporary urban planning. Prentice Hall.