Throughout the six days I spent in Japan I noticed the planning context
of Japan through various settings. In majority, I noticed the striking
difference between Australia and Japan in regards to planning in the physical
landscape. The landscape overall gave an impression of a chaotic space with
high density housing situated next to urban agricultural land next to a single
story dwelling being a regular vision throughout the landscape. This was
particularly noticeable in Osaka but was present across all the cities visited
in Japan. This led me to believe that Japan appears to not have strict planning
regulations or zoning, apart from basic development rules in regards to safety
of some developments. The Japanese landscape is a stark contrast from the
landscapes of Australia, where strict planning legislation is followed
explicitly. In Australia this practice results in a significant amount of
unusable or open space but in Japan, the population density and land mass
limits the possibility of this in the landscape. These practices give an
impression of a highly mixed use space but a somewhat organised one, by fitting
different land uses in where they fit into the landscape. There has also been
the unintentional or not creation of unofficial zones. This was apparent in
Tokyo where the highly valuable land of the commercial district in close
proximity to Tokyo train station has restricted the potential of any
residential development within at least a kilometre of the space due to the
extreme cost of occupying that valuable space. Japan also gives an impression
of a fairly affluent society. An example of this came from exploring the
tsunami affected city of Sendai where after the event the government provided
and is still providing the clearing and restoration of the affected spaces.
The social norms of Japan, including the significance of
multi-generational households and traditional culture in regards to gender
roles, has had an impact on the physical landscape through some development
occurring to appeal to a particular demographic. Traditional gender roles could
be linked with gender inequality resulting in an impression of a lesser
progressive nation in regards to this context compared to Australia. The
cultural differences are witnessed throughout the landscape in regards to
housing with wealth not flaunted by size as it is in Australia but through the
quality of the materials used throughout their home. These cultural differences
are also shown through the evident pride the Japanese people have for their
spaces. Throughout the whole of Japan I constantly saw the absence of public
facilities such as rubbish bins, yet I was never met with the presence of
littering as I would in Australia. I also witnessed the absence of other public
facilities such as on-street seating and public toilets. The absence of these
facilities on the street however are fulfilled by the strong presence of these
facilities throughout the many train stations in Japanese cities. In Japan, the
train stations are not just a highly effective transport facility but also destination
shopping and food facilities too. These privately owned spaces provide all the
needs of the consumers of these spaces that the public spaces do not.
Overall, it is difficult to tell if the planning in Japan is actually as
chaotic as it seems and if that chaos is intentional or just the result of the restraints
Japan faces in regards to population density and land mass.
Kaylee Thompson
Kaylee Thompson
No comments:
Post a Comment