Study smarter with Fiveable
Get study guides, practice questions, and cheatsheets for all your subjects. Join 500,000+ students with a 96% pass rate.
City planners don't just draw maps—they shape how millions of people live, work, and interact with each other. When you study influential planners, you're really studying competing philosophies about what cities should be: efficient machines for living, organic communities that grow from the ground up, or something in between. The AP exam tests your ability to recognize these different approaches and explain how they've shaped urban form, from the grand boulevards of Paris to the mixed-use neighborhoods Jane Jacobs fought to protect.
Understanding these planners means grasping core concepts like functionalism vs. human-scale design, top-down vs. bottom-up planning, and the tension between modernization and preservation. Don't just memorize names and projects—know what each planner believed about the ideal relationship between people and their built environment. That's what FRQs will ask you to analyze.
These planners believed cities needed nature to be livable. Their work established the principle that public green spaces are essential infrastructure, not luxuries.
Compare: Olmsted vs. Howard—both championed green space, but Olmsted worked within existing cities while Howard proposed entirely new planned communities. If an FRQ asks about different approaches to urban green space, contrast these two.
These planners embraced bold, top-down redesigns that prioritized efficiency, circulation, and monumental aesthetics. Their philosophy: cities should be rationally planned by experts, not left to organic growth.
Compare: Haussmann vs. Le Corbusier—both imposed top-down visions, but Haussmann worked with traditional architecture and street-level activity while Le Corbusier rejected the traditional street entirely. This distinction matters for questions about modernist vs. pre-modernist planning.
These planners focused on rational spatial organization—using geometry and regional thinking to create order and improve living conditions.
Compare: Cerdà vs. Geddes—Cerdà imposed a uniform grid system, while Geddes emphasized adapting plans to existing conditions. Both influenced modern planning, but represent systematic vs. contextual approaches.
These planners pushed back against top-down modernism, arguing that good cities emerge from the needs of residents, not the visions of experts.
Compare: Jacobs vs. Le Corbusier—this is the central debate in 20th-century planning. Le Corbusier wanted towers in parks with separated uses; Jacobs wanted dense, mixed-use streets with organic activity. Know this contrast cold for any FRQ on urban planning philosophies.
These planners prioritized large-scale systems—transportation networks, bridges, highways—that physically restructured metropolitan areas.
Compare: Moses vs. Jacobs—they literally fought each other over the Lower Manhattan Expressway. Moses represented expert-driven, automobile-centered planning; Jacobs represented community resistance and pedestrian-scale urbanism. This conflict defines the shift in American planning philosophy.
| Concept | Best Examples |
|---|---|
| Green space as essential infrastructure | Olmsted, Howard, Burnham |
| Top-down modernist planning | Haussmann, Le Corbusier, Moses |
| Grid systems and rational organization | Cerdà, Burnham |
| Community-centered / bottom-up planning | Jacobs, Bacon, Geddes |
| Regional and ecological thinking | Howard, Geddes |
| Urban renewal and demolition | Haussmann, Moses, Le Corbusier |
| Historic preservation approach | Geddes, Bacon, Jacobs |
| Automobile-oriented development | Moses, Le Corbusier |
Which two planners most directly represent opposing philosophies about whether cities should be planned by experts or shaped by residents? What specific projects or writings illustrate their views?
Compare Howard's Garden City concept with Le Corbusier's Radiant City. Both included green space—how did their visions for urban living fundamentally differ?
If an FRQ asked you to explain how 19th-century urban renewal differed from mid-20th-century modernist planning, which planners would you contrast and why?
Identify three planners who prioritized pedestrian-scale, mixed-use environments. What common principles unite their approaches?
Robert Moses and Haussmann both transformed major cities through large-scale projects. Compare their methods, goals, and legacies—what do their similarities and differences reveal about the politics of urban planning?