I’ve been studying planning at the University of New Mexico staring fall 2019, with the goal of improving and complementing my architecture education. While taking Urban Planning, I’ve realized how much this class has exposed me not only to new topics and concepts, but it has also served as a lesson in perspective. A lesson into different was to think, as well as living different instructional methods. Already having experience in other schools, and already have a Bachelor in Architecture, I can see the differences in how each school approaches teaching.

 

During the first half of the semester here in my Social Issues in Urban and Regional Planning course, I’ve had several opportunities to self-reflect allowing me to see that navigating the educational system can be like a maze. You just keep sailing and aiming for something better, but sometimes those routes can lead to crash upon the rocks at low tide. There have been a couple of topics that have impacted me, One came from a brief comment where it was mentioned how sometimes school doesn't prepare nor give an idea of what the field is going to be like. It was a situation I encountered in which after finishing a bachelor’s in architecture. The field was presented with plenty of job prospects and economic potential.

 

Only after graduation did the realization that there are way more students graduating into the field that there are job openings, which I know now is common for many academics. Another issue was also with an unsatisfactory academic experience I had. There was rampant bullying, harassing, and maquette vandalizing at the school. Even when reported the school never took action, and there was no accountability. The atmosphere and hostility of the school caused a feeling of unease. It wasn’t conducive to an academic setting. As well as the approachability of the some of the faculty, whom it seemed better to have as minimal interaction as possible. Whereas the courses, faculty, and students at UNM have proven a stark contrast, with open-minded faculty who encourage thinking and new ideas.

 

Towards the end of school, myself like many of my colleagues debated how what we were shown at school applied to a firm or construction setting. We debated how those teachings could be utilized. We knew how to do floor plans and design, but there was no preparation to entering and dealing with the workforce. There was also the feeling of many ideas and concepts that could have benefitted from a more open environment.

 

This fall also introduced me to the intricacies of planning, and the various aspects, from the political, cultural, technological, and infinite number of factors that go into Urban Planning. One of the many topics that impacted me the most was technology and the commute. How city development and size grew when advances in technology allowed people to live further apart.

 

The concepts I’ve learned while in class are the direct correlation between technology, culture & city development. The rule that dictates city size is a 30-minute commute. Rome had the half-hour walking commute limit, Paris had it, London had it set by the streetcar, and currently, cities have it set by the car. Now transitioning to digital technology the commute is becoming virtual. On one hand, we could vilify the commute whom led to urban sprawl, traffic and pollution while on the other hand it could be said the commute brings us closer together, where we can now live, work, and study in different cities, exposing us to more people, opportunities and ideas that our local community can afford us. Advances in technology are bringing us closer together, there is only so much technology can do, but nothing can beat human interaction and be there.

 

My point is that as technology increases, we should be aware of the places a filter on our lives, like seeing special occasions through a screen while recording or taking pictures versus using your own eyes to experience it. We can use technology to minimize direct or one on one human interaction, but at what cost. The commute still brings us together, it forces us to interact and leave the comfortable confines of home, or neighborhood. The commute is not inherently bad per se, but it should be more efficient and minimized as much as possible. The downtown commute still plays a role, but now as a central meeting place. A place where everyone comes in together, a common space. My interest in the commute comes from commuting both one city to another city in a different state daily like many friends of mine do. As well as having a 10-minute walking commute, and knowing many people with 600 miles a week commutes.