Urban theory since A Theory of Good City Form (1981) – a progress review

Abstract

Kevin Lynch's magnum opus A Theory of Good City Form (1981) is well known as a normative theory of the city. The intersection of human purposeful activity and city form is a principal feature. However, little attention is given in the literature to a small appendix in the book, A Theory of Good City Form (1981), in which the theories that explain the form and function of the city are classified and reviewed. The brief review insightfully reveals embedded values that are implicit in urban theory. We use a similar classification to review the progress of urban theory since Lynch's brief assessment noting the city's complexity can only be effectively explained through multiple historical and theoretical, value‐laden perspectives. The values are the bridge between human purpose and city form, between substance – the city – and procedure – decision making about the city, that is between urban theory and planning (procedural) theory. Finally, the review is concluded with the implications of urban theory, informed by A Theory of Good City Form, for urban morphological design theory as well as planning (procedural) theory.

Keywords:

• urban theory
• good city form
• performance dimensions
• Kevin Lynch
• urban morphology
• planning theory
• progress review

Notes

1. This progress review furthermore indicates the relevance of urban theory for procedural planning theory. The historical “theory” of the city provided the value of viability attributed to a durable city form neighborhood‐unit concept. Procedural planning methods and codes of new urbanism derive their substantive contents from this value. Historical and material theory of the city provided the substantive materials – the elements of the city form, housing, infrastructure and the like for direct and indirect public sector, urban planning management and procedural roles. Issues of regional inequity in the provision of the services, and the patterns of investment and disinvestment and the resulting impact in city form are elucidated with reference to production, reproduction and circulation of capital. The multiple decision theory of the city similarly provided procedures for urban planning theory. Communicative action theory of planning has emerged with recognition of multiple participants in deliberation and possible conflict in values that are not represented by the unitary concept of public interest. Therefore, the role of the planner as facilitator, mediator, and negotiator is suggested particularly in dispute resolution involving controversial public choice decisions.