UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MARA

PERAK BRANCH
SERI ISKANDAR CAMPUS

FACULTY OF ARCHITECTURE, PLANNING & SURVEYING

DIPLOMA IN TOWN AND REGIONAL PLANNING (AP111)
TPS111- FUNDAMENTAL OF TOWN PLANNING
PREPARED BY: NUR KHAMILIA BT AHAMAD KHIR
STUDENT ID: 2020841848
CLASS: AAP111C
DATE OF RECEIVED: 16th OCTOBER 2020
DATE OF SUBMISSION: 12th NOVEMBER 2020
PREPARED FOR: SIR MUHAMMAD RIJAL BIN MOHAMMAD

1
TABLE OF CONTENT

NO CONTENT PAGES

1.0 INTRODUCTION 3

2.0 THE PUBLIC INTEREST CONCEPT OF ITS 4-5

ORIGIN AND EVOLUTION

3.0 UNDERSTANDING IN PUBLIC INTEREST 6-7

CONTENT

4.0 CONCLUSION 7

5.0 REFERENCES 8

2
No3: Town planners mostly concerned with ‘public interest’. Discuss with
example the roles of town planners in safeguarding this aspect.

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Planning is to some extent about the development of property, land use and environmental
conservation, having the role of putting together and at the same time dealing with the economic,
social and environmental goals in a way that benefits the public well-being, the interest of the
community with current concerns about its characteristic and natural diversity. However, there is
a large number of published studies investigating, analysis and also argue exists, of public
interest as a concept. Therefore, we can also state that the understanding of the public interest has
don't have an accurate definition but it is important to formulate for design public policy. It must
also be remembered, nevertheless, that public interest is a normal concept in natural. It represents
ideal to be accomplished by planning, but not generally an ideal that is universally subscribes to.

2.0 THE PUBLIC INTEREST CONCEPT OF ITS ORIGIN AND EVOLUTION

3
The definition and idea of the public interest is, according to Moroni (2004), somewhat
controversial nowadays. Even if several planning theorist and practitioners of planning make
really good efforts to help and managing and preserving the principle of public interest, the
traditional concept is at danger of disappearing forever. In planning, it has even become a
general trend to assume there is very little public interest are exist, this may be one of the
explanations for the different and ambiguous meanings differentiation discussed by the planning
and political theory (Moroni, 2004). Conversely, according to Grant (2005), Substantive theories
truthfully assume that the theory exists and they consider that it is worthy of being understood by
professional planners.
However, through this uncertainty, great deal of work has been made to incorporate and
accommodate the sense of the public interest within the planning concept and operation.
Economic situations throughout history, the method of changing the ideas of policy and policy
on planning and public planning have wider changes have been made to any environmental
issues were illustrated and called to attention. Even though in the middle ages, the idea survive
initially related connected to the Republican administration. Then, with the Renaissance, it
shifted into popular revolutionary politics, the focus was then moved to the notion that the public
is the state representative.
Since the enlightenment ,the public interest had a new meaning which strongly concentrated
on the principle of interest and eventually appeared in the modernist idea of being the collectivist
image private individuals (Alexander, 2002): this helped industrialization to develop democratic
political theory and liberal democratic thought (Schibata,2006).
Around the 17th and the 18th of the centenaries, several public health and social policy
changes have taken place and in order to behave in the public interest. As substantial population
struggled in the 19th century, huge development of cities, challenges connected to public health
which demanded a new way of government implication. The city center areas that are
overcrowded and unsanitary It contributed to considerable economic costs and requested an
intervention of the market Powers and the privileges of private property (Cullingworth and
Nadin, 2002) with a view to creating a structure capable of working in the public interest and
producing social security. From one perspective, the planning of cities and countries formed
from health and housing policies (Cullingworth and Nadin, 2002)
As a result of a revolution in the 1940s, report on Barlow, latest, significant recommendations
in order to delegate the private interests to the public ones. This marked the beginning of the
modern welfare state and, with regard to its concept, acted in public interest. In reality, the Town
Planning Act of 1947 offered a broad regulation of development by giving a regulatory role to
planning (Cullingworth and Nadin, 2002) although the notion of the public interest remained a
questionable issue, and the public's position in planning was greater.
Inside the theoretical conversations, the public interest was raised by some of the
postmodernist critiques as universalizing concept a problematic notion in a diverse world

4
(Campbell and Marshall, 2002). Howe (1992), according to an important predictor of the way
planners think about their partnerships to the decision makers and to the public mainly depends
on their definition of the term.
Alexander (1992) discusses the general interest as a foundation for the approach to rational
planning and as the standard model for comprehensive planning. In addition, (Moroni 2004) it
argues that during the planning period and it serves as a condition in the appraisal of alternative
planning proposals. Furthermore, the planning process should be developed of practice with
consideration to the divergence of public interest (Davidoff, 1965).While planning should be a
constructive exercise in the public interest in democratic societies. In particular, it seems like, the
critical appraisal results in the political transparency and practice of getting streams that
represent entirely distinct interests than anyone they really had to (Stein and Harper, 2003)
In recognizing planning as a profession and planning as a activity, it plays a crucial role not
just in an individual way but also in a wider sense, via the integrity of the frameworks of
planning (Swain and Tait, 2007) with respect to public trust, and by the essence of planning
criteria. Though planning and activity as a career is categorized, as an operation which functions
in the public interest (Campbell and Marshall, 2002), It faces pressures in certain instances to
cope with the different interests and in “making everyone happy” .Therefore this leads to
problems in creating public interest in the proposal that the planning system functions in the
general interest truthfully (Swain and Tait, 2007). As it can be seen, a growing number of
aspirations and attempts are being made to improve the accountability of professionals, servants’
public and politicians. There does another language for planners that has a significant importance
in leading them know and developing institutions pursue decision processes that sustain and
improve the normative liberal democratic principles.
This is the trust vocabulary. Trust is the key to the work of planners. Without trust all will
collapse” (Stein and Harper, 2003, p. 137).There is, thus, a need to build environments in which
trust can be created and sustained in the long term. The public interest is in close association with
general social problems and cultural issues (Sandercock, 1998), the right to land, power,
influence, various ideologies and, of course, strong and varied political principles. As
demonstrated above, for that function, it is difficult to determine the concept's exact definition.

3.0 UNDERSTANDING IN PUBLIC INTEREST CONTENT

5
 Without substantial information, planning has no principles (Campbell and Marshall, 2002)
and the convincing need for planning and the need for new social ambitions, seen from a positive
perspective, will drive city planners to give form and content to the public interest (Davidoff,
1965).
Collaborative planning has now risen in prominence and implies that developers work
together to identify the public interest and discovering complex approaches to settle disputes and
generating positive effects for all (Grant, 2005) the theory of strategy has distanced from the 20th
century and we are increasingly approaching a new historical theory period of post-industrialism,
globalization, post-Fordism, and the “new economy” (Campbell and Fainstein, 2003). Proper
concepts such as normative theories such as legislative theories can be used to figure out the
public interest planners like “new urbanism and smart growth” through which the urban form
becomes a common benefit. A modern plan for mixed use, clean, pedestrian-friendly streets is
included in these priorities (Grant, 2005).The question about how to fulfill the popular interest
nowadays, however, emerges as democracy and the well-being created leads to a society needing
improvements in the social order, culture, environment, but it does not plan to add to this
function with anything.
We can mention travelling, as an example, where some sections of the population would
like to have unlimited options for travel, In the case of traffic congestion, though, they are not
calm. Therefore, new perceptions and new desires are emerging. Further, the anticipated
friendliness and promised quality of life will be another example, but many members of society
fail to take care of the consumption of electricity, water usage and waste recycling. The only
problem is the mindset that makes planners a dilemmatic with regard to the society’s interests,
their idea of it leads one to feel that we can never hit a level when it was to separate, consider
and satisfy that interest. As planners, our job is to explain our ethical outlook and illuminate the
equal preferences set in the results of planning. In terms of the nature of land, infrastructure and
services, planning requires political decisions. Outcomes are not acceptable for all in many
situations, there is not always a common consensus, and resources are often limited. However,
our role is to represent not only problems, but alternatives for those take part in the decision-
making process are also open as well as for those influenced by such options (Grant, 2005).
For example, Campbell (2005) talks about a certain category of planners who see their
practices of planning as form of service. As a result, they believe that community members
should primarily "go along with the planning” especially since they believe in the public interest,
they aim to serve the public interest in their course of action, and overall. As a result, these
planners hope to see the advantages of the public interest from tenants, developers, and elected
officials. According to Swain and Tait (2007), planning requires a network of competing social
desires, economic, political and environmental context. It was framed as a public-interest
practice (Campbell and Marshall, 2002),in addressing these different issues with respect to the
public interest, it encounters pressures, this adds to problems in securing trust, which indicates
that the planning mechanism definitely operates in the public interest.

6
 In terms of today, we may conclude that it is clear many scheduling systems are seeking to
represent the public interest, but in those planners, the great danger they face lies the public
interest concept of which is restricted to physical planning and the future social influence that
inevitably contributes to disruption to other groups in society is not taken into consideration.

4.0 CONCLUSION

As shown in the content above, the public interest is part of our common well-being. This
encourages us as a society to work together as in an economy, an environment that can provide it
to members. There are many ways to create a political situation such as being able to meet
demand by using methodologies, processes and policies to be able to develop and consider the
diversity of public interest rights.
Currently, the community's biggest concern about land development, land use regulations
and development frameworks is to contribute to the determination of urban planners. Therefore,
redefining and determining the exact public interest will be a new milestone in the planning and
policy making process. Society has a new interest and it is very important to know which to
create such a situation so that land use planning can make it possible to achieve it. To develop
consensus and public trust is one of the important elements in the design profession that can be
reflected by professional identity. In a democratic society, on the other hand, it needs to be told,
but to contribute to this phase, a certain level of accountability is also required. However, in such
planning decisions, it is important for them to contribute to the public interest and consider it.
Ultimately, this is more in line with the needs of planning as a profession, trying to differentiate
the planning profession from other professions in an ethical and rational way from other
occupations.

5.0 REFERENCES

7
BOOKS
- MORONI, S. (2004), Towards a Reconstruction of the Public Interest Criterion, Planning
Theory, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 151-171.
- ALEXANDER, E. R. (2002), The Public Interest in Planning: From Legitimation to
Substantive Plan Evaluation, Planning Theory, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 226-249.
https://www.scribd.com/document/319642561/Planning-Theory
- SHIBATA, K. (2006), the public interest: understanding the state and the city planning in
Japan, London School of Economics Department of Geography & Environment, London
- CULLINGWORTH, J. B., NADIN, V. (2002), Town and Country Planning in Britain, 13th ed.
Routledge, London.
- CAMPBELL, H., MARSHALL, R. (2002), Utilitarianism’s Bad Breath? A re-evaluation of
the Public Interest Justification for Planning, Planning Theory, vol. 1, no. 2, pp.
- HOWE, E. (1992), Professional Roles and the Public Interest in Planning, Journal of Planning
Literature, vol. 3, pp. 230-248.
- DAVIDOFF, P. (1965), Advocacy and Pluralism in Planning, Journal of the American Institute
of Planners, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 331-339.
- STEIN, S. M., HARPER, T. L. (2003), Power, trust, and planning, Journal of Planning
Education and Research, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 125-139.
- SWAIN, C., TAIT, M. (2007), The Crisis of Trust and Planning, Planning Theory and Practice,
vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 229-247.
- DAVIDOFF, P. (1965), Advocacy and Pluralism in Planning, Journal of the American Institute
of Planners, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 331-339.
- GRANT, J. (2005), Rethinking the Public Interest as a Planning Concept [Online], Plan
Summer/ Été pp. 48-50, Dalhousie University: School of Planning.
- CAMPBELL, S., FAINSTEIN, S. S. (2003), Readings in Planning Theory, 2nd ed. [E-book],
Malden, USA, Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
ARTICLE
- https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/7005171.pdf
- https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/42605662.pdf