This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Jones, K. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Planning, Representation, and the Production of Space In Lexington, Kentucky

Department of Geography at the University of Kentucky in Lexington, Kentucky; joneska{at}mail.ecu.edu

Much of planning theory has incorporated the communicative practice critique to deconstruct both plans and planning. These critiques have given planning theorists and practicing planners a useful way to think about how plans through their very structure, language, and techniques-may empower certain participants and disempower others. To date, however, the deconstruction of plans as texts still remains to be extended to a critical deconstruction of plans as spatial texts. Because planning embodies representations about the spatial-material world, its language is also spatial, and this spatial language may benefit from the lens of a deconstructive spatial critique. This paper begins by laying out a rationale for such a critique. I then show how an explicitly spatial deconstruction might proceed, and finally, I turn this examination to one particular plan for a neighborhood in the city of Lexington, Kentucky.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Lauria and J. A. Wagner What Can We Learn from Empirical Studies of Planning Theory? A Comparative Case Analysis of Extant Literature Journal of Planning Education and Research, June 1, 2006; 25(4): 364 - 381. [Abstract] [PDF]