Placemaking in Planning: A simple buzzword or a new planning movement?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract

 
 
 This article is an investigation into the role of placemaking in the modern planning profession, with a focus on the evolution of placemaking, evaluation through the lens of a case study in Edmonton, AB, and analysis through three planning theories. It is argued that the ideas of placemaking have existed for much longer than the word itself. A brief background is provided detailing the development of placemaking. Examples of placemaking throughout history are discussed with a focus on the writings of Jane Jacobs. The Imagine Jasper Avenue and Experience Jasper Avenue pilot projects are explored, with a discussion of their placemaking elements. The history of Jasper Avenue as Edmonton’s main street and efforts to reimagine Jasper Avenue in the face of intense public scrutiny are investigated. Finally, placemaking is analysed through three planning theories: Planning as Design, the theories of Michel Foucault, and Semiotics. The major themes of these theories and their application to both placemaking and the case study are examined.
 
 
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it