T he idea behind this article originates from two observations. The first is that expressions and remarks-such as "scamscapes" (Soja 1996), "theming and stage sets" (Loukaitou-Sideris and Banerjee 1998), "the obsession with design," and "the superficial aesthetics and picturesque aspects of cities" (Inam 2002, 37)-question the current practices in urban design and place making. These critiques call for a "meaningful urban design" 1 that recognizes the importance of "rich experiences, processes and evolution of cities" (Inam 2002). The second observation is that rethinking the pedagogy of place and place making will help us pave the way toward a meaningful urban design.To this end, there are those who emphasize the visual and physical attributes of place, whereas others use broader contexts, categories, and mechanisms in their attempts to understand place. For the latter group, the study of place is grounded in the large political-economic forces that mediate and redefine the physical setting and has less to do with matters related to design and aesthetics. These approaches, in our opinion, complement each other and require the development of appropriate teaching methods.The objective of this article is to explore new ways of engaging planners in discussions about place and to articulate its dynamics for pedagogical purposes. Debates about the pedagogy of place have both conceptual and practical dimensions. At the conceptual level, the problem is how to define place and seek appropriate teaching and learning methods that help achieve a meaningful urban design. At the practical level, the problem is whether studio teaching should continue to emphasize skill building based on the preconceived notions of urban space rather than on the multilayered notion of place. Based on these observations, we propose that planning studios should be expected to raise awareness, increase knowledge, and, to a much lesser extent, encourage generating preconceived design solutions; second, they should focus more on place and place making than on urban spaces.Against the backdrop of the competing arguments and overlapping interpretations of place, this article is organized in three main sections. Following a discussion of the concept of place, the linkages of place to planning, and our proposal of four ontological assumptions, the article focuses on a project that began as part of a ten-week urban design studio for sophomores enrolled in the School of Planning at the University of
AbstractThis article revisits the concept of place in planning and urban design and proposes a conceptual framework consisting of four ontological constructs of place as a set of visual attributes, product, process, and meaning. The article discusses the theoretical underpinnings of each concept and explores the advantages of a continuum between these terms to help bridge the gap between policy planning and physical design and to move toward a meaningful urban design. The study also examines the application of the proposed constructs of place to a sophomore-pl...
