Christopher Jones (1980), in his seminal work on design methods, offered a succinct yet thought-provoking definition, describing designing as “to initiate change in man-made things.” This broad characterization encompasses the fundamental essence of urban design as a catalyst for transforming the built environment.

Ken Baynes (1976), in his insightful exploration of design, acknowledged the inherent complexity and subjectivity involved in defining the term. He astutely observed that “How you define design depends on what you are trying to do. A definition of design that would be useful to the designer might not help an historian and could possibly outrage a philosopher.” This recognition of the multifaceted nature of design highlights the diverse perspectives and priorities that shape its interpretation.

Paul Spreiregen (1965) envisioned urban design in grandiose terms, ascribing to it an ambitious and comprehensive scope that spanned various scales and domains. His vision encompassed everything from regional and national planning to the intricate design of street furniture, encompassing urban renewal initiatives, historic preservation efforts, and the exercise of aesthetic control. This expansive conceptualization underscored the far-reaching implications and diverse facets of urban design.

Kevin Lynch (1960), in his seminal work “The Image of the City,” employed the terms “urban design” and “city design” interchangeably, reflecting the intertwined nature of these concepts. However, in his later work, Lynch advocated for a broader and more expansive interpretation of city design, encompassing a wide range of activities from preparing regional access studies to revitalizing public squares (1981). This evolution in Lynch’s thinking mirrored the growing recognition of urban design’s multidimensional nature.

Jane Jacobs (1964), a pioneering voice in urban theory, cautioned against the reductionist approach of treating cities and neighborhoods as mere architectural problems. She asserted, “To approach the city… or neighborhood as if it were a larger architectural problem… is to substitute art for life.” This critique highlighted the need for urban design to transcend aesthetic considerations and engage with the lived experiences and dynamics of urban environments.

Frederick Gibberd (1953) offered a more traditional and aesthetically-oriented definition, characterizing the purpose of town design as “to see that (the urban) composition not only functions properly, but it is pleasing in appearance.” This perspective emphasized the visual and compositional aspects of urban design, reflecting the enduring influence of design traditions rooted in architectural and artistic principles.

In contrast, Buchanan (1988) adopted a more holistic and experiential approach, defining urban design as “essentially about place making, where places are not just a specific space, but all the activities and events that make it possible.” This interpretation underscored the importance of considering the dynamic interplay between physical spaces and the social, cultural, and experiential dimensions that imbue them with meaning and vitality.

Edward Relph (1976) and David Canter (1977) contributed to the discourse by developing models that captured the multifaceted components of a “sense of place.” These models were later reinterpreted and expanded upon by Punter (1991), reflecting the ongoing efforts to conceptualize and articulate the complex interplay of factors that shape our experience and perception of urban environments.

Robert S. Cook (1980) portrayed urban design as a process aimed at achieving four distinct yet interrelated qualities: visual, functional, environmental, and the urban experience. This multidimensional perspective acknowledged the diverse considerations that urban designers must navigate, from aesthetic and practical concerns to environmental sustainability and the creation of meaningful and engaging urban experiences.

Ian Bentley (1985) proposed a framework of seven qualities that characterize responsive environments: permeability, variety, legibility, robustness, visual appropriateness, richness, and personalization. This set of principles highlighted the importance of designing urban spaces that are accessible, diverse, comprehensible, resilient, visually appealing, rich in experiences, and capable of fostering a sense of personal connection and ownership.

The Prince of Wales (1989) outlined a set of ten principles that he believed should guide urban design efforts, including considerations such as place, hierarchy, scale, harmony, enclosure, materials, decoration, art, signs and lights, and community. This multifaceted approach underscored the multidimensional nature of urban design, encompassing not only physical and aesthetic factors but also the integration of artistic elements and the fostering of a sense of community.