The place of place : case studies of place in Victorian planning schemes

Built environment and lived experience are inextricably interwoven. The Australian State of Victoria’s planning framework prioritises the physical characteristics of space above their socio-psychological correlates, as reflected in the relatively limited remit of ‘place’ in formal decision-making. The Victorian planning model struggles to accommodate the uniqueness of specific places in the process of development, despite the driving role it plays in expansion. A literature review investigating definitions of place and place identity determined that although place has been defined variously, and at times with some contradiction, there is broad consensus that it can be understood as the interrelation between the physical characteristics of a landscape and the sensory faculties of an individual and an individual’s experience. This interrelationship is in turn determined by social constructs. Depending on an individual’s length of residence in a particular physical location, place influences individual and social psychology through both the formation of place attachment and identity. While place attachment to landscapes has been described using a variety of complex methodologies, translation of this work into architectural and planning practice has been limited within Australia in general and Victoria in particular. The Victorian Shires of Surf Coast and Frankston are considered as examples of current best practice in integrating place into planning. Key issues highlighted in the conclusion include: the difficulties of incorporating qualitative information within the Victorian Planning Scheme; the importance of correctly measuring place attachment, rather than landscape preference; and the complexities, costs and ethical implications of describing place attachment for integration within the planning system.<br />