Signature Redacted Associate Profesi Brent Ryan Departmentof Urban Studies and Planning MA Tfisis Supervisor Accepted by Signature Redacted Associate Profe'ssor P
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
PLAYING IN PLACE: WHAT PLANNERS CAN LEARN FROM PLAY by Gary Chan B.A. in Urban Studies Stanford University Stanford, CA (2011) Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASSACHUSET INSTI MASTER IN CITY PLANNING OFTEC*4OLOGY at the JUN 19 2014 MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY June 2014 LIBRARIES @ 2014 Gary Chan. All rights reserved. The author here by grants to MIT the permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of the thesis document in whole or in part in any medium now known or hereafter created. redacted A uth or _ _p__ Signature_ _t__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Department of Urban Studies and Planning May 23, 2014 Certified by ---- -Signature redacted Associate Profesi Brent Ryan Departmentof Urban Studies and Planning MA Tfisis Supervisor Accepted by Signature redacted Associate Profe'ssor P. C1Vistopher Zegras Chai(NMCP Committee Department of Urban Studies and Planning Playing in Place: What Planners Can Learn from Play by Gary Chan Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning on May 23, 2014 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in City Planning Abstract Public participation, though an integral part of Western contemporary planning practice, is largely viewed as lacking by academics, planning practitioners, and the public at large. The obstacles to more effective planning engagement are abundant: while critique from the lenses of academics and practitioners have been focused in the realm of institutional or structural issues or lack of interest or capacity on the part of the public, this thesis argues that a greater consideration of how people understand and engage with place on an everyday level is necessary. This thesis examines play in the context of planning and place, arguing for play as a component of public participation practice. It proposes play as a participation method that creates space for navigating different understandings of the built environment. Playful engagement with the built environment-whether in the form of manipulation of objects or in movement through space-provides a different lens through which participants view their surroundings. This thesis finds that this engagement with the built environment in this space of play allows for a reconciliation of differing understandings of place and a cultivation of agency within participants. Thesis Supervisor: Brent Ryan, Associate Professor of Urban Design and Public Policy Thesis Reader: Susan Silberberg, Lecturer 3 Table of Contents Introd uction ................................................................................................................................................. 7 Chapter 1: People and Place ...................................................................................................................... 15 Chapter 2. Engagement in Planning............................................................................................................ 25 Chap ter 3: Play ......................................................................................................................................... 3 9 Chapter 4: Case Studies .............................................................................................................................. 49 Case 1: Participatory Chinatown .................................................................................................... 52 C a se 2 : P la c e -It .......................................................................................................................... 6 0 C a se 3 : C ity o f Pla y .................................................................................................................... 67 Conclusion: Directions for Planning............................................................................................................... 77 Works Cited .............................................................................................................................................. 85 6 Introduction In Western democracies, community engagement of place; however, existing processes of public participation and public participation have been fundamental to the do not address place in terms that are accessible to the public practice of planning for many decades. However, they are also they hope to reach. They fall short in providing a context for simultaneously largely recognized as areas that can be further the reconciliation of different understandings and relationships improved upon, and subjects of ongoing critique from multiple with place, instead being recognized as spaces of contention or perspectives: from the public that inhabit places affected by frustration (Innes and Booher 2004, Graham and Healy 1999). planning efforts, by academics studying planning from a variety This thesis argues that there is a disconnect between of perspectives, and from practitioners themselves (Albrechts the aims of community engagement and the way it is practiced. 2002, Bailey et al. 2011). Challenges to participation stem from As pointed out in Albrechts's work, a large portion of the a variety of causes: some may be rooted in inherent institutional critique of planning has focused on issues of fair process, lack failures or systemic injustices; others may be the result of a lack of education, or apathy, with less focus placed on the qualities of engagement culture from community members; others may that make places meaningful to people (Albrechts 2002). To a be largely due to shortcomings in processes. large degree, critiques of public participation practices carry an In a recent survey of municipal officials, the top three assumption that the public possesses an inherent motivation topic areas in which cities solicited public engagement were and capacity to participate; shortcomings often lie with the zoning/land use, downtown development, and neighborhood institution or government and their process, rather than planning (Barnes and Mann 2011). These all pertain to issues being attributed to the stakeholder's lack of desire to engage. 7 This thesis examines the role of public participation in spatial to build civil society, and to build community capacity (Innes planning practice, (including a look at commonly-cited obstacles and Booher 2004). This thesis aims to tie these purposes into a and shortcomings), and broaches an alternative framing of the consideration of place-a concept that extends beyond physical mandate for participation. In doing so, it proposes the need location or settings, but into consideration of the various for attention to the relationship between people and place, meanings that are embedded within them. The meanings and specifically, to the multiplicity of understandings of the embedded in place are largely subjective, and can vary from environments around us. person to person; they can also present points of affective Innes and Booher critique the typical formal avenues for attachment to a place (Cresswell 2004, Altman and Low 1992). public participation in the US context-public hearings, review Picking up on threads from authors such as Graham and Healy and comment procedures, and commissions-which, they and Manzo and Perkins, this thesis argues that consideration of argue, fail to provide opportunities for meaningful engagement. these issues should be viewed as a larger component to public They enumerate five purposes for participation, arguing that engagement (Graham and Healy 1999, Manzo and Perkins existing methods fall short in achieving all but the last: 1) for 2006). This thesis looks at play as one way to navigate this decision-makers to learn public preferences, 2) to incorporate relationship with place. Play simultaneously offers a framework local knowledge to improve decisions, 3) advancing fairness to re-think this relationship, as well as a source of techniques to and justice, 4) establishing legitimacy, and 5) to appease legal enact this new means of relating to the environment. mandates. They also introduce a sixth and seventh purpose: 8 Play and Place those who study play from the perspective of development and This thesis examines play in the context of planning and education recognize benefits to play: these range from creativity place, arguing for play as a component of public participation to social interaction to a sense of engagement. practice. It proposes play as a participation method that creates The value of play to discussions of planning engagement space for navigating different understandings of the built lie beyond the outcomes that play elicits. Rather, it is the implicit environment. Playful engagement with the built environment- qualities of play, and the experience of the player, that are worth whether in the form of manipulation of objects or in movement taking a closer look at. Play is a medium through which people through space-provides a different lens through which begin to understand the world around them differently. It participants view their surroundings. This thesis provides enables people to re-interpret their surroundings by introducing examples of what it would look like to deploy techniques that alternative meanings and mechanics with place. incorporate play into planning practice. Play is a concept that, while widely recognized and Methodology understood, is ambiguous and amorphous. Part of this This thesis aimed to address the question of how ambiguity is in the establishment of