Advertisement

Planning as a Function of Preserving the Identity of Place

  • Nenad LipovacEmail author
  • Gojko Nikolić
  • Svetislav Popović
  • Nikolina Gradečki
Chapter
Part of the The Urban Book Series book series (UBS)

Abstract

People create Places, but can hardly distinguish Places from Space as the definition of Place is a complex integration of nature and culture manifested in physical terms, which has been developed and is still developing in particular locations. Places are linked by a flow of people and goods between them, and each of them has its attributes—altogether creating the Identity of Place. Proper respect of cultural and natural heritage values, along with adequate safeguarding and maintaining, will help in preserving the Identity of Place. The most effective tool a planer can use in managing and controlling the Place Identity and its valuable identity attributes is a clearly defined planning process that will result in setting clear and omni-understandable planning ordinances and proposed methodologies for conserving/preserving (protecting) the Identity of Place. This paper proposes possible planning steps that represent a planning model researched and developed within the HERU, scientific project, which could help achieve this goal. The planning process today is a multidisciplinary one, with professionals from different fields taking part. The planner’s role is to coordinate and combine all of their efforts within a single document (physical or urban plan), a document that will create a unique searchlight for the Place development. To make it possible and reach that planning model, all participants must speak the same (professional) language. We need something we all shall agree upon—a relevant glossary within a field that will be prepared by professionals, not by lawmakers.

Keywords

Identity of Place Identity with Place Place Appearance Identity attributes Planning ordinances Planning steps 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The research is part of the scientific project “Heritage Urbanism—Urban and Spatial Planning Models for Revival and Enhancement of Cultural Heritage.” It was financed by the Croatian Science Foundation [HRZZ-2032] and carried out at the University of Zagreb, Faculty of Architecture.

References

  1. Lipovac N (1997) Space and place. Prostor 1(13):1–35Google Scholar
  2. Lipovac N (2000) Planning as a function of preserving the identity of place. Dissertation, University of California, University of ZagrebGoogle Scholar
  3. Lipovac N (2014) English-Croatian professional glossary for urban and physical planners, architects and landscape architects. Acta Architectonica, University of Zagreb Faculty of ArchitectureGoogle Scholar
  4. Lipovac N (2018) English-Croatian professional glossary of cultural heritage. Acta Architectonica, University of Zagreb Faculty of ArchitectureGoogle Scholar
  5. Lipovac N, Popović GS, Robina M (2015) The understanding of professional and legal terms in physical planning—better protection of cultural heritage. In: Obad Šćitaroci M (ed) Cultural heritage—possibilities for spatial and economic development. Proceedings of international scientific conference heritage urbanism, Zagreb. University of Zagreb Faculty of Architecture, pp 48–53, Oct 2015Google Scholar
  6. Lipovac N, Popović GS, Gradečki N (2017) Pojmovnik kulturnog naslijeđa—model za primjenu u zakonodavstvu. In: Obad Šćitaroci M (ed) Modeli revitalizacije i unaprjeđenja kulturnog nasljeđa Economic development. Abstracts of international scientific conference heritage urbanism, Zagreb. University of Zagreb Faculty of Architecture, p 104, Oct 2017Google Scholar
  7. Lukerman EF (1964) Geography as a formal intellectual discipline and the way in which it contributes to human knowledge. Can Geogr 8(4):167–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Republic of Croatia (2017a) Cultural heritage protection and preservation act. National Gazette No. 69/99, 151/03, 157/03, 100/04, 87/09, 88/10, 61/11, 25/12, 136/12, 157/13, 152/14, 98/15, 44/17Google Scholar
  9. Republic of Croatia (2017b) Spatial planning act. National Gazette No. 153/13, 65/17Google Scholar
  10. Republic of Croatia (2018a) Environment protection act. National Gazette No. 80/13, 153/13, 78/15, 12/18Google Scholar
  11. Republic of Croatia (2018b) Nature protection act. National Gazette No. 80/13, 15/18Google Scholar
  12. Republic of Montenegro (2017) Space planning and building act. Official Gazette No. 64/17Google Scholar
  13. Steiner RF (1991) The living landscape: an ecological approach to landscape planning. McGraw Hill Inc. Arizona State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  14. Tuan YF (1975) Space and place: humanistic perspective. In: Gale S, Olsson G (eds) Philosophy in geography. Theory and decision library (An international series in the philosophy and methodology of the social and behavioral sciences), vol 20. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  15. Violich F (1996) Identity: key to meaningful place-making, the case for Berkeley. Prostor 2(10):201–216Google Scholar
  16. Yeang K (1995) Designing with nature: the ecological basis for architectural design. McGraw HiIl, New York, NYGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nenad Lipovac
    • 1
    Email author
  • Gojko Nikolić
    • 2
  • Svetislav Popović
    • 3
  • Nikolina Gradečki
    • 4
  1. 1.Faculty of ArchitectureUniversity of ZagrebZagrebCroatia
  2. 2.Department of GeographyUniversity of MontenegroNikšićMontenegro
  3. 3.Faculty of ArchitectureUniversity of MontenegroPodgoricaMontenegro
  4. 4.Faculty of ArchitectureUniversity of ZagrebZagrebCroatia

Personalised recommendations