Hi guys! nice to write here again. lately I find some good-listening song. one of them is Save You by Simple Plan. nice lol :D. but, nothing to do with that song nor its lyrics in this post. I just want to share an interesting topic that my lecturer have taught me this afternoon in class.
A method call ‘student center‘ have make us, a.k.a the students, to be more active, giving us chance to speak up our minds and of course, being appreciated. a simple way to do that was through discussion session or simply debating others. that’s exactly what happened in my class this afternoon. my lecturer, her name is Mrs. Nurini and she was teaching the city’s morphology and architecture, was explained about “planned city” and “unplanned city“. She explicates its definition, mentions some of its characteristics and asks back to us checking whether we paid our attention or not. just as usual.
After another part of lesson being taught, she, again, open a query’ session. a response popped up from back rows. due to its subject, it consists of two questions. first, he asked about which one is better, planned city or the unplanned city. if you choose that a planned city is better than the unplanned city, you have to give an idea of how to tide over the unplanned city. or else, you say that unplanned city was better then you have to give a logic explanation about it. the last question is which one of those is better for being implemented in Indonesia.
tik tok tik tok.. finally, one of my classmates was going to answer it in the first place. he said that he prefer to planned city than unplanned city, because it’s more well-organized, the other point is that planned city needs a planner like us to create the master plan, form its shapes, and manage the essential rules. so its could one of our benefits in the future, lol 😀 and his response about other question is that he think the condition of Indonesia itself already good. just need a better solution to change it to be somewhat even more better.
I took the second chance of speaking for debating him. because I have a different point of view. in some cases, the planned city probably become a very nice idea to make and applied. based on the theories itself, this kind of perfect-looking city, purposely set a high priority to efficiency and economic value. a good idea for many specific places as in Chicago, Brasília, the federal capital of Brazil, Rotterdam, main seaport of the Netherlands, Chandigarh and many more. you can see the list of other planned cities by clicking the first link appear next. http://www.answers.com/topic/list-of-planned-cities. but certainly not in Indonesia. a country which divided into some big islands and uncounted small islands. a place with so many different cultures and religions and beliefs. where the people were living more into social-religious.
Well, for me, the planned city is a well-build-architectural city. a beautiful one to see, but its benefits were depends. in this globalization era, despite of the fact that world’s today population is extremely increased, a planned city which offer a ready-to-use infrastructures and public services, great road-connectivity, a strong land use plan also its procedure and many more, has more than reasons I mention before to attract lotta people to come and start living in that place, because its facilities and its convenient were promising. but merely in several decades it will growth into inappropriate shape and doesn’t fit anymore with the original blue print. in the end, because the lack of ideal-place-for-living, those planned city would become just like the unplanned one.
Moreover, referring to the presentation, the other shortage of planned city is that it has monotone traits and less ability to conciliate with the landscapes and the various elevations when it being implemented which clearly has made it hardly applied in Indonesia due to its multiform landscapes and topographies. That’s why I favored the unplanned city. citizen, however, due to the instinct of human that given by God, will accomplish their daily living needs, such as transportation, infrastructures, public facilities, food, etc. exactly as it did in Indonesia. else, the unplanned city perhaps also give contributions for some new land using in an isolated places.
Enough about mine, there is still one other opinion, that stated by my other classmates. a boy and a girl. but their idea was merely the same. they explain about the correlation between specific conditions toward the needs of the area and the citizens itself. it means that both planned city and unplanned city were in the same important level. some things that need to be considered was what a city needs – really needs – to make the citizen feel pleased also convenient. furthermore, the environmental carrying capacity also became one more essential factor that need to be considered on deciding whether a city will need to be planned or not.
C O N C L U S I O N
Well, decision on applying the planned city or the unplanned city -once again – is depends. there are a lot of aspects that have to be considered. both from the physical aspects, such as environmental carrying capacity, topography; and its social aspects, such as traditions, religions and beliefs, and more.
but, surely, in Indonesia the concept of unplanned city was preferable. it suits our diversity that we have in ethnics, cultures, and habits as well. better than the planned city did. however, creating and planning a new city is still possible to be done in Indonesia. especially in a new and large area that freely available and have an adequate resources for surviving the citizens living and fulfill their needs.