“Urban Center” as a privileged place for shaping shared urban vision

When a phenomenon produces polysemous definitions (terms with very different meanings regarding social and cultural dynamic contexts), it is necessary to use the approach philosophers define as ‘hermeneutic’. In fact, regarding matters concerning communication and participation to urban policies, the term ‘Urban Centers’ is often used ambiguously, including a variety of structures. “Urban Center” is a term used to describe any institution whose core mission is to inform and engage the citizens in urban planning and public policy. Around the world, these kinds of institutions are fast becoming the most effective way cities can facilitate community involvement. Because they are supposed to offer the public a non-partisan, centralized location for all planning, policy and urban design information relative to their city, Urban Centers should be the perfect neutral ground for architects, planners, city officials, and community members to hold discussions and debates on proposed changes to public policy and the built environment. This issue is related to the wider context of participatory approach in the public planning domain which has become institutionalized as a method of good planning practice as opposed to the “rational hierarchical comprehensive” approach. In the public sphere, especially in community planning, democratic principles and public participation have become increasingly accepted as means for balancing and rationalizing multiple interests and preferences. The goal of participation is to forge consensus among interested parties, including planners, decision-makers, citizens and advocacy groups, outside the traditional decision-making setup. Participation is thus viewed as a community action that is meant to increase the institutionalized democratic processes. The theme of interpretative keys in the information points and urban policies they undertake, seems to form the “fil rouge” which reconnects the kaleidoscope of different cultural roots, legal traditions, administrative dimensions and partnership styles with traditional and emerging stakeholders who have been characterising the phenomenon of the extension of decisional areas for several decades.