Planning and Instant Gratification

Instant gratification – to see results quickly to ones satisfaction – is culture. It’s a type of mentality. It’s a way of life. It reflects our way of organizing and interacting with one another.

It can be seen in most aspects of our dominant culture, in the likes of gambling, technological gadgets, food preparation, all-in-one stores, key-ready family houses, complete vacation packages, numbers-based vs. values-based election promises, war declarations, and, naturally, in the never-ending search, sale and consumption of “silver bullets”, be it slimming pills, happy pills, erection pills or a solution to any other instant symptom-based problem at hand.

Whatever urge considered, holding off the urge to achieve instant satisfaction instead of a delayed but promised greater satisfaction is no little challenge.

Urban Planning that Satisfies

Trends in current urban planning takes increasingly place within the built boundary of cities. After decades of intense land development at the undeveloped fringes of cities, now the pendulum is swinging towards rearranging past land uses, increase job and population density and thus also changing the flow of people and services within and between the urban boundaries. It can be labeled Smart Growth, but to city planners it’s in the end a matter of City Building. Immigration is the driving factor, which brings both opportunities and challenges to all cities inside and outside of the Greater Golden Horseshoe.

Now, there are typically 4 actors in this drama.

  • Land owners and building corporations
  • The City bureaucrats
  • The City Councillors
  • The Public

Often the case is that everyone wants what’s best for the City. That’s a good starting point. However, new planning requires new solutions, which require new consumer tastes and products, and new public acceptance. Getting the majority of people (consumers and established residents) to respond positively to the desired changes is one challenge, and getting the drivers of change to responsibly bring about the change (socially, economically and environmentally; i.e. respect community character, public spending and environmental carrying capacity) is the flip-side of the coin.

It’s within this paradigm developers, planners and residents must meet at the middle ground to both reach the objective of smarter growth patterns. Time and education are two major components in this regard. The foreign must learn the local realities and the local must learn the larger context. Instant gratification is however not a likely result to such a process. Thus, to all who want to be part of the change – the march to the ocean for salt was done by foot (a Gandhi metaphor) – and this transformation will likely change participants as much as it changes their neighbourhood.

The danger is to lose the patience, settle for the quick satisfaction and miss the opportunity to reach a twice as good outcome (that’s a marshmallow metaphor). This goes for all parties, naturally. As the video illustrates, that’s easier said than done…

Advertisement

About Kent Hakull

I'm fascinated and engaged when looking at urban and regional planning theory and reality, policy and practice. And this is what I research currently: (1) Smart Growth theory, (2) the Places to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, Ontario, and the Downtown Secondary Plan in Guelph, Ontario (one of 25 Urban Growth Centres) policy, and (3) the early stages of redeveloping the 5 Arthur Street South (Downtown Guelph), a brownfield site, in practice.
This entry was posted in Urban Planning and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s